Third Hypothesis

There will be differences in teachers’ and parents’ involvements, and teachers’ consistency before the counselling intervention programme and after it.

In the first stage of the analysis I examined the difference between the experimental group and the control group in parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency before conducting the counselling intervention programme. The difference was examined by t test of two independent samples.

Table 11

Means and standard deviations in parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among students of the two groups before the counselling intervention programme, t test value

Group N Means of parental involvement (1-5) Standard deviation T Control 30 1.27 1.08 -0.705 Experimental 33 1.45 1.03

The findings presented in the table above indicate the absence of clear difference between the control group students and the intervention group students before conducting the counselling intervention programme, in the parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency variable.

In the second stage I examined the difference between the experimental group and the control group in parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency, after conducting the counselling intervention programme in order to examine if any change occurred in the perception of the K5-2 students. The difference was examined by t test for two independent samples.

Table 12

Means and standard deviations in parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among students of the two groups after the counselling intervention programme, t test value. Group N Means of parental involvement (1-5) Standard deviation T Control 30 1.57 1.25 -2.572* Intervention 33 2.27 0.88 *p<0.05

The findings presented in the table above indicate a clear difference between the control group students and the experimental group students after conducting the

counselling intervention programme in parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency (t = -2.572, p<0.05); parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among the experimental group students were higher than the control group students.

I also examined the difference among the intervention group students before and after the counselling intervention programme in the parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency.

Table 13

Means and standard deviations of parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among the intervention group students before and after the counselling intervention programme, t test value

Group N Means of parental involvement (1-5) Standard deviation T Before 33 1.45 1.03 -3.469** After 33 2.27 0.88 **p<0.01

The findings presented in the table above indicate a clear difference among the intervention group students before and after the K5-2 students participated in the counselling intervention programme in parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency (t = 3.469, p<0.01). parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among the intervention group students after the counselling intervention programme was more positive than before the programme, in other words a significant and positive change occurred in parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency.

Conclusion: the counselling intervention programme brought about a positive change and improvement in parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among the experimental group students.

According to the differences in teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency before the counselling intervention programme and after it.

In the first stage, I examined the difference between the intervention group and the control group in teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency before conducting the counselling intervention programme, the difference was examined by t test for two independent samples.

Table 14

Means and standard deviations of teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among students of the two student groups K5-1 and K5-2 before the intervention, t test value. Group N Means of teachers’ involvement (1-5) Standard deviation T Control 30 2.13 0.94 0.182 Experimental 33 2.09 0.91

The findings presented in the table above indicate the absence of a clear difference between the control group students and the experimental group students in teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency before conducting the counselling intervention programme. The two groups K5-1 and K5-2 were equivalent on the dimension of teacher involvement.

In the second stage, I examined the difference between the experimental group and the control group in teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency, after conducting the counselling intervention programme in order to examine if any change occurred in teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency as a consequence of participation in the programme.

Table 15

Means and standard deviations of teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency in treating unacceptable behaviour and in grading student work among the students of the two groups after conducting the counselling intervention programme, t test value.

Group N Means of teachers’ involvement (1-5) Standard deviation T Control 30 2.17 0.87 -6.785*** Intervention 33 3.73 0.94 ***p<0.001

The findings presented in the table above indicate a clear difference between the control group students and the intervention group students after the experimental group participated in the counselling intervention programme (t = 6.785, p<0.001). The level of teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among the intervention group students is higher than it is among the control group students following the intervention group’s participation in the counselling intervention programme.

I also examined the difference among the intervention group students before and after the counselling intervention programme in teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency in treating unacceptable behaviour and in grading student work.

Table 16

Means and standard deviations of teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among the intervention group students before and after the counselling intervention programme, t test value

Group N Mean of teachers’ involvement (1-5) Standard deviation T Before 33 2.09 0.91 -7.152*** After 33 3.73 0.94 ***p<0.001

The findings presented in the table above indicate a clear difference among the intervention group students before and after they participated in the counselling intervention programme in teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency in treating unacceptable behaviour and in grading student work (t = 7.152, p<0.001). The level of teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency among the intervention group students after the counselling intervention programme, is higher and more positive than it was before the programme. In other words a significant and positive change occurred in teachers’ involvement, evaluation and consistency following their participation in the counselling intervention programme.

Conclusion: the counselling intervention programme brought about a positive change and improvement in teachers’ and parents’ involvement, evaluation and consistency in the treatment of unacceptable behaviour and in grading student work among the intervention group students.