A Comparative Study of Anxiety, Emotional Maturity,
Security-Insecurity among Adolescents of Co-Education
and Unisex Education Schools


By

Mrs. Charu Vyas
Sr. Lecturer
FHS
Banasthali University
Banasthali
 


ABSTRACT:

Girls and Boys study in either co-educational or unisex-educational environment. Whether the presence of both sex and single sex affects the development of emotional maturity, anxiety and security - insecurity in adolescence? In order to find its answer, a study was conducted on girls and boys studying in class XI in the schools of Muzzafarnagar. No significant difference was found in anxiety, emotional maturity and security - insecurity of boys and girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

INTRODUCTION

Environment plays a very important role in the personality development of the child. The type of environment, determines the development of a person. If environment is very stimulating and rich, it will create favorable impression in the person on his/her development and if this environment is dull or insipid, behavior is likely to be shaped in an unhealthy way. Home plays an important role in molding the personality of children in early infancy. Home is the first socializing agency where the child learns the patterns of behavior prevalent in the community. Some of the early experiences leave indelible impression on the minds of children, which to a great extent continue influencing the behavior of children throughout life. The type of behavior of parents, siblings and other members of Society also influences the child's growth. Since the home is first institute therefore parents temperaments, behavior, character and mutual relations influence child's personality development.

Schools are one important place where children have contacts with their peers, form friendship, and participate in social groups with other children. As children grow from infancy through adolescence, peers are increasingly important in their lives. Their interactions become more complex with age. In adolescence- peer relationship affect whole personality. Girls and Boys have different characteristics, needs etc. to each other, therefore people think that due to these differences it is must to provide different educational conditions and for this purpose tradition of unisex education emerges. But with the modernization of society people think that for development of an androgynous personality of individual or for better development of individual, it is must to provide that type of educational condition in which individual easily understand the characteristics of their opposite sex and for reducing antagonism, the trend of coeducation emerges. Here the question arises if presences of both sex and single sex effect the development of Emotional maturity, anxiety and security - insecurity in adolescence. This research was undertaken to find answer to this problem.

RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

The study was expected to help the parents, teachers, and administrators of the school to provide such an environment where they feel free and can take a decision by themselves and where they can live emotionally stable, and which is best suited to good adjustment so that their potentialities can be used to the maximum as to promote their personality. After study of related literature it was found that no study has been carried out on anxiety, emotional maturity, security-insecurity among adolescents of co-education and unisex education schools.

OBJECTIVES

1. To study the effect of nature of school on anxiety of adolescent girls.
2. To study the effect of nature of school on anxiety of adolescent boys.
3. To study the effect of nature of school on emotional maturity of adolescent girls.
4. To study the effect of nature of school on emotional maturity of adolescent boys.
5. To study the effect of nature of school on security- insecurity of adolescent girls.
6. To study the effect of nature of school on security-in security of adolescent boys.

HYPOTHESIS:

1. Anxiety of adolescent girls coming from co-education and unisex education school does not differ significantly.

2. The anxiety of adolescent boys coming from co-education and unisex education school does not differ significantly.

3. The emotional maturity of adolescent girls coming from co-education and unisex education school does not differ significantly.

4. The emotional maturity of adolescent boys coming from co-education and unisex education school does not differ significantly.

5. The security - insecurity of adolescent girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school does not differ significantly.

6. The security - Insecurity of adolescent boys coming from coeducation and unisex education school does not differ significantly.

METHODOLOGY

POPULATION AND SAMPLE:

The population under study consisted of girls and boys studying in class XI in the following three schools of Muzaffar Nagar district.

1. Kisan Inter College
2. Janta Vedic Inter College
3. P.T. Usha Senior Secondary Girls School

The sample of 120 students was obtained by purposive sampling, out of which 30 girls and 30 boys of coeducation school and 30 girls and 30 boys from unisex education school were chosen. All of these belong to middle socio-economic status.

TOOLS FOR DATA COLLECTION:

1. Anxiety Scale: - S.E. Kurg, I.H. Scheier and A.B. Cattell
2. Emotional Maturity Scale: - Dr. Yashvir Singh and Mahesh Bhargava
3. Security - Insecurity Scale: - Dr. Beena Shah

METHOD OF ANALYSIS

Measure of central tendency - Mean
Measure of dispersion - Standard deviation
Test of significance of difference between means-t test

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

T 1.1 The anxiety of adolescent girls coming from co-education and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Coeducation

38.2

4.18

1.048

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Unisex education

40.73

5.16


T 1.2    The anxiety of adolescent boys coming from co-education and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Coeducation

37.76

6.03

0.29

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Unisex education

38.16

4.12


T 1.3 The emotional maturity of adolescent girls and boys coming from co-education and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Boys

37.96

5.30

0.48

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Girls

37.47

5.68


T 1.4 The emotional maturity of adolescent boys coming from co-education and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Coeducation

77.9

15.46

0.44

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Unisex education

75.74

21.26


T 1.5 The emotional maturity of adolescent girls coming from co-education and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Coeducation

93.94

32.78

1.88

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Unisex education

78.97

27.54


T 1.6 The emotional maturity of adolescent boys and girls coming from co-education and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Boys

76.78

18.33

1.88

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Girls

86.45

33.88


T 1.7
The security - insecurity of adolescent girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Coeducation

101.9

21.6

1.89

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Unisex education

110.3

10.2


T 1.8 The security - insecurity of adolescent boys coming from coeducation and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Coeducation

111.74

18.74

1.25

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Unisex education

105.57

18.97


T 1.9 The security - insecurity of adolescent boys and girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school

SAMPLE

MEAN

S.D.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEANS

     

Level of significance t value

Boys

108.65

18.93

0.78

Insignificant at 0.05 level

Girls

106.1

17.42


RESULTS:

The statistical evaluation of various hypotheses has revealed the presence of:

1. Insignificant difference in anxiety of adolescence boys coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

2. Insignificant difference in anxiety of adolescent girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

3. Insignificant difference in anxiety of adolescence Boys and Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

4. Insignificant difference in Emotional maturity of adolescence Girls of coeducation and unisex education school.

   i. Significant difference in Emotional instability of adolescence Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

   ii. Significant difference in Emotional Regression of adolescence Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

   iii. Significant difference in social maladjustment of Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

5. Insignificant difference in Emotional maturity of adolescent Boys of coeducation and unisex education school.

   i. Insignificant difference in Emotional instability of Boys coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

   ii. Insignificant difference in Emotional Regression of Boys coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

   iii. Significant difference in lack of Independence of Boys coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

6. Insignificant difference in Emotional maturity of Girls and Boys coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

7. Insignificant difference in security - Insecurity of Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

   i. Insignificant difference in family security of Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

   ii. Insignificant difference in school security of Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

8. Insignificant difference in security - Insecurity of Boys coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

9. Insignificant difference in Security - Insecurity of Boys and Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

Thus there is no significant difference in Anxiety, Emotional maturity and security - Insecurity of Boys and Girls coming from coeducation and unisex education school.

SUGGESTIONS FOR PARENTS:

1. Family is the primary agent, which plays an important Role in the development of a child, hence it is necessary for parents to provide best possible environment in Home, so as to promote, their development.

2. Emotional security not only affects child's physical growth but also his emotional development. By providing love and affection, child feels more secure and in turns, he/she is more emotional balanced.

3. Parents should never discourage their children, especially those who suffer from anxiety.

4. Provide protective and enriched environment to increase secure experiences

5. Help the children to maintain a harmonious relationship with everybody in home and outside

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Arnold Magda B : 1960. Emotion And Personality Vol. 2 New York. Adelson. J. (Ed.) 1980. Handbook of Adolescent Psychology. New York, John Willy and Sons Inc.

2. Admas, J.F. 1975. Understanding Adolescence. London: Allyn and Bacan Inc. Boston.

3. Ambron S.R. 1975. Child Development. San Francisco Rinehart Press.

4. Arndt, W.B. Jr. 1974. Theories of Personality. New York, Macmillan publishing Col. Inc.

5. Asthana, H.S. (Ed.) 1979. Indian journal of psychology. New Delhi, Indian psychological Association. Vol. 55 (2).

6. Best J.W. 1981: Research in Education: 4th Ed; Englewood cliffs; Prentice Hall Inc.

7. Bhatia, H.R. 1969. General psychology, Bombay, Oxford Publishing Co. III Ed.

8. Bhatia, K.K., Purohit, T. 1985 - Educational psychology and methods of Teaching: Ludhiyana : Kalyani publiching Co.

9. Bourn, E. Bsktrand B.R. 1976. Psychology: It's principle and meaning, New York. Holt. Rineheart and winston IV Ed.

10. Brophy, J.E. 1977. Child Development and Socialization, New York, Science Research Associate publishers.

11. Bowlby, J: 1969. Psychopathology of anxiety, The Role of affactional bond. Special publication No.3.
 


Mrs. Charu Vyas
Sr. Lecturer
FHS
Banasthali University
Banasthali
 

Source: E-mail March 28, 2008

          

Articles No. 1-99 / Articles No. 100-199 / Articles No. 200-299 / Articles No. 300-399 /
Articles No. 400-499 / Articles No. 500-599 / Articles No. 600-699 / Back to Articles 700 Onward
Faculty Column Main Page