37 shows that there is no significant difference exists Further in the area of

37 shows that there is no significant difference

This preview shows page 6 - 10 out of 10 pages.

area of district leadership, the F-test value of 0.17 shows that there is also nosignificant exist. Therefore, the decisions of hypothesis are accepted.The Significant Difference in the Level of Leadership Tendency of UM Business Students When Grouped According to their Program
Background image
As presented in Table 5, the F-test was used to determine if there was asignificant difference in the level of leadership tendency of UM business studentswhen respondents were grouped according to their program.The indicator of the level of leadership tendency is measured if there weresignificant difference in the area of leader efficacy. The F-test value of 0.79 showsthat there is no significant difference exists. In the area of collective efficacy, the F-test value 1.15 shows that there is no significant difference exists. Further, in thearea of district leadership, the F-test value of 0.93 shows that there is also nosignificant exist. Therefore, the decisions of hypothesis are accepted.Table 3.Significant Difference in the Leadership Tendency of UM Business Studentswhen grouped according to their AgeIndicatorSumofsquareDfMeanSquareF-testSignificantDifferenceDecisionon Ho
Background image
Leader EfficacyBetweenGroup0.16810.1681.0780.304AcceptHoWithinGroup15.242980.156Total15.4199Collective EfficacyBetweenGroup0.41310.4132.4030.124AcceptHoWithinGroup16.827980.172Total17.2499District LeadershipBetweenGroup0.09210.0920.5020.48AcceptHoWithinGroup17.858980.182Total17.9599Table 4. Significant Difference in the Leadership Tendency of UM Business Studentswhen Grouped According to their SexIndicatorSumofsquareDfMeanSquareF-testSignificantDifferenceDecisionon Ho
Background image
Leader EfficacyBetweenGroup0.19810.1981.2780.261AcceptHoWithinGroup15.211980.155Total15.4199Collective EfficacyBetweenGroup0.23810.2381.370.245AcceptHoWithinGroup17.002980.173Total17.2499District LeadershipBetweenGroup0.03210.0320.1740.677AcceptHoWithinGroup17.918980.183Total17.9599Table 5. Significant Difference in the Leadership Tendency of UM Business Studentswhen Grouped According to their ProgramIndicatorSumofsquareDfMeanSquareF-testSignificantDifferenceDecisionon Ho
Background image
Leader EfficacyBetweenGroup0.74960.1250.7920.578AcceptHoWithinGroup14.66930.158Total15.4199Collective EfficacyBetweenGroup1.19360.1991.1520.339AcceptHoWithinGroup16.047930.173Total17.2499District LeadershipBetweenGroup1.01560.1690.9290.478AcceptHoWithinGroup16.935930.182Total17.9599
Background image

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 10 pages?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture