AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
t-test for sets of data with the same variance. Before that, to find
out whether the variance of the sets are really the same, F-test
was used. Results of F-test (Table 1) proves that there is no
significant difference between the set variances (p = 0.09).
Consequently, based on the results of t-test (Table 2) the null
hypothesis was rejected (p = 0.00005) on the significance level
α = 0.05.
Table 1: F-test results
2010
2018
Mean
5.92
7.41
Variance
4.38
6.01
Observations
60
102
df
59
101
F
1.37
P(F<=f) one-tail
0.09
F Critical one-tail
1.48
Table 2: t-test results
2010
2018
Mean
5.92
7.41
Variance
4.38
6.01
Observations
60
102
Pooled Variance
5.41
Hypothesized Mean Diff.
0
df
160
t Stat
3.95
P(T<=t) one-tail
0.00005
t Critical one-tail
1.65
P(T<=t) two-tail
0.00
t Critical two-tail
1.97
Rejection of the null hypothesis H0 means, that there has been
proved that there is a statistically significant difference between
the results achieved by pupils in 2018 and 2010. The difference
is in benefit of the pupils in 2018, what confirms also the means
of the achieved score (average number of points achieved by the
pupils in the respective years: in 2010 – only 5.92, in 2010 –
increase to 7.41).
The test task T4, in which pupils in 2010 achieved in average a
higher point score than pupils in 2018, was focused on
knowledge of technical materials, in particular wood. Solving of
the task bears relation to the lowest level on Niemierko`s
taxonomy (Niemierko, 1979), as well as the task T6, at solving
of which the pupils were more successful in 2010 (the task
focused on the right clothing and shoes in the workrooms,
difference between the means achieved by pupils at this task in
2010 and 2018 was minimal 0.87 vs. 0.83 respectively).
The biggest difference of the results was recorded at the test task
T5 (0.32 vs. 0.80), which tested the pupils` understanding of the
content of the term ecological. As this term has been used in
common and pupils can meet it also in other subjects teaching
(e.g. in biology), this results is quite surprising.
4 Discussion of the results
The research results proved that the innovation of the State
educational program of technology education has brought
improvement of pupils` quality education. But it should be under
investigation whether also the pupils` skills have been improved
proportionally to the knowledge increase, so as the secondary
vocational schools require it. However, pupils` skills strongly
depend on material-technological equipment of schools and
investigation of different researches show that technology
teaching supporting equipment of schools is very poor (Hašková,
Bánesz, 2015).
As to the scope and content of technical subjects taught at basic
schools, after 10 years of basic school reformation we have come
back nearly to the level as we had before the reform. Almost,
because five years of the reform was enough for basic schools to
disappear the classrooms specialized for technical subjects
teaching (workrooms) and with them also the appropriate
equipment, devices, tools, teaching aids and materials necessary
for pupils` practical training activities.
Due to the national projects Creative Workrooms I and Creative
Workrooms II a 226 of the basic schools obtained material-
technological equipment appropriate to ensure technology
teaching, from the total number of 1400 schools in Slovakia it
has been only a very small part (ŠIOV 2013 - 2015; ŠIOV
2015).
Figure 1: Comparison of the pupils` results achieved at the
particular test tasks in 2018 with results from 2018
It is necessary to mention that based on an intervention of the
respective section of the Ministry of education, science, research
and sport of the Slovak Republic, into the innovated educational
standard there was introduced an additional part topically
focused on household economy. This was done at interest of 33
lessons per year, previously allocated to technology teaching.
Under a direction of the Ministry it was recommended to schools
to teach at the most 11 lessons per academic year in grades 5
th
-
9
th
. Professionals assess this step as a very inappropriate,
enabling to schools not to fulfil in the whole range requirements
put on them through the valid innovated educational standard of
technology (Pavelka, Kuzma, 2017).
5 Conclusion
Current state of teaching technology at basic schools offers a
hope that due to the introduction of the innovated educational
standard for technology there will be created in successive steps
appropriate conditions for technical education development and
support. Otherwise, one can hardly expect that in the
forthcoming years pupils` interested in studying technical
branches will be increased.
On the other hand, not only the professionals point to a need of
further updating of the innovated State educational program to
adapt it to the current requirements of practice and society. In
current form the innovated State educational program is only at
the half of its way to be a decisive document determining content
of education, and its further innovation is necessary (Papuga,
2015).
Literature:
1. Act No. 245/2008 on education and training (Education Act)
and on the change and supplement to some acts as amended by
subsequent provisions. Available at: https://www.minedu.sk/
12272- sk/zakony/.
2
. Ďuriš, M. – Majerník, J.: Možnosti hodnotenia žiakov v učive
technickej výchovy na 2. stupni základnej školy. In: Technické
- 95 -