INTRODUCTION:

“In times of change, the learners will inherit the Earth while the knower’s will find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.”

A smart class room is where the concept of blended learning is blooming. Smart class rooms are technologically enhanced that enable teaching and learning is fun when subjects are interesting and smart classes are doing exactly that by making the student most boring subject palatable. With ICT development, various smart devices and web services have been applied to classrooms. Interactive white board has appeared and many students have smart phone and smart pads.

A smart classroom is a ramped-up mode of education which instead of taking way from education on the attention span of students adds opportunities to the existing traditional classroom setup. The opportunity to provide student with quality education by helping game understand concepts better, improve their reading and comprehension skills and achieve academic excellence. The purpose of the study is comparing the effect of the smart classroom throw data collection and analysis of the given classrooms. For an effective analysis, 10^th grades in an secondary school had participated, the teacher had taught the same class twice, once in the way of traditional teaching learning and second class was carried out with the smart devices and smart teaching learning method.

Review of related Literature:

Researches done in India.

Indian Research:

Anju and Sharma (2016) in their research paper titled, “Effectiveness of Educomp smart classroom teaching on achievement in mathematics at elementary level analysed80 the effect of Educomp Smartclassroom teaching on achievement in Mathematics at elementary level. The study consists of 80 students of class VIII of Navyug Public School, Sonipat (Haryana). Achievement test containing 60 Questions was used to collect the data. Experimental group, consisting of 40 students, was taught using Educomp Smartclassroom and control Group of 40 students was taught using Conventional classroom”.

Anju and Sharma (2016) in their research paper titled, “Effectiveness of Educomp Smart Classroom Teaching on Retention in Mathematics at Elementary Level, analysed the effect of Educomp Smartclass room teaching on Retention in Mathematics at elementary level. The study consists of 80 students of class VIII of Navyug Public School, Sonipat (Haryana). Achievement test containing 60 Questions was used to collect the data. Experimental group, consisting of 40 students was taught using Educomp Smartclass room and control Group of 40 students was taught using Conventional classroom”.

Bano (2016) in her research paper titled, “Impact of Smart Classroom Learning Environment on the Performance of First Grade Students in English investigated the 81 effect of smart classroom learning on the performance of first grade students in English subject. The present study is an experimental one and is conducted in Srinagar district of Kashmir. The investigator has taken 30 first grade students from Govt. High school Bakshipora. The investigator conducted experiment on the basis of pre-test and post-test. Performance test standardized by the investigator was used for the collection of data and t-test (correlated groups) was used to analyse the data. The result reveals smart classroom learning positively affects the performance of students in English”.

Srivastva (2015) in his research paper studied, “Efficacy of Educomp Smartclass, the effectiveness of Educomp smart class for enhancing student’s academic performance and studied the attitude of students when multimedia was used in classroom. The study revealed that Multimedia Instructional Strategy enhanced the student’s cognitive achievement and also interest in Mathematics. The students' cognitive achievement and interest in Maths were enhanced mostly by the multimedia strategy and minimally by the conventional strategy irrespective of sex. It is evident that the use of video tape in teaching math’s concepts provides precise visual feedback and hence incontrovertible evidence of what happened in the class”.

Menon (2015) in her research paper analyzed, “the effectiveness of smart classroom teaching on the achievement in Chemistry of secondary school students. The study investigated 320 Class IX students from Amritsar city. Achievement test in Chemistry of 82 50 items was used to collect the data. Experimental group was taught in smart classrooms and control group was taught by conventional mode of instruction. The results revealed that students achieved higher when taught in smart classes as compared to conventional mode of instruction. Learning styles of students did not affect their achievement in experimental and control group. No interaction effect of instructional strategies and learning styles was foun

Foreign Research:

Taleb and Hassanzadeh (2015) in their research paper titled, “Toward Smart School: A Comparison between Smart School and Traditional School for Mathematics Learning, found the quality of nation’s political, social and economic future will depend on the capabilities of their young generation. Smart schools have been proposed as a solution to increase the capabilities of the new generation in the era of ICT. Recently, many smart schools have been established in Iran and other developing countries. The aim of this study is to compare smart training method and traditional training method in learningretention processes of Mathematics”.

Taleb et. al. (2015) in their research paper titled, “the effect of m-learning on mathematics learning, found that mobile technology opens the door for next generation and let the learning occurs in anytime, anywhere and to be influence in a variety of learning contexts. The study was conducted in 329 teachers from 2352 secondary school teachers of Mathematics from 19 districts of Tehran using descriptive-field method during 2012-2013 academic years. A researcher-made Likhert-type questionnaire was developed to identify the teachers’.

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:

1. To study of mean difference between boys and girls of smart class

2. To study of mean difference between boys and girls of traditional class

HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY:

Hypothesis H_{0 1}: There will be no significant mean difference between boys and girls on smart classrooms

Hypothesis H_{0 2}: There will be no significant mean difference between boys and girls on traditional classrooms

Variables of the Study:

The variables involved in the study are as follows:

Dependent Variables:

In an experiment, the dependent variable is a variable whose values are expected to change as a function of the independent variables (Cottan, Uhler, Mastors and Preston, 2010). Effectiveness of the study is measured in terms of achievement of the students. So, effectiveness is considered as a dependent variable.

Independent Variables:

Independent variables are the conditions or characteristics that the experimenter manipulates to ascertain their relationship to observed phenomena (Best and Khan, 2002). Teaching method is an independent variable. So, the teaching through conventional method, teaching through smart classroom with the support of teacher and teaching through smart classroom without the support of teacher are considered as independent variables.

Population and sample of the study:

In the present study sample of (N-120) students of 10^th grade was drawn randomly. Out 120 students, they were randomly divided into two groups with reference to their score of pre- test, post- test.

METHODOLOGY:

Research design:

In the present study there had two groups which were experimental group and control group.

Research tool:

Self made power point presentation as smart class technique with the help of smart devices is included in the smart class.

Statically technique:

Mean, stander deviation, critical ratio are being applied to analysis the data.

M = ∑X

Where,

M = Mean

∑X= Sum of Total Score

N = Total Number of Frequency

σ =

Where,

σ = Standard Deviation

d²= Square of the Deviation from Arithmetic Mean

N = Number of Score

M₁-M₂

C.R =

Analysis of Data and Its Distribution:-

Tabulation

Table-4.2.4 Showing Mean, SD, and CR value of Boys and Girls on Smart Class-Room Teaching

Groups	N	Mean	SD	CR	Sig. or Not Sig.
Boys	30	49.16	5.67	1.52	Significant
Girls	30	49.80	4.72	1.52	Significant

Fig-4.2.4-Graph Showing mean, SD of Retention of students in smart classroom teaching

By analyzing Mean of Boys group 49.16 and Girls Group is 49.8.The standard Deviation for student of Boys group 5.67 and girls group is 4.72. For df value 58 of t or CR at 0.05 levels the table value is 2.00 and calculated value is 1.52 which is less than the table value thus the H_{0 (4)}is accepted.

Table-4.2.5 Showing Mean, SD, and CR value of Boys and Girls on Traditional Class-Room Teaching

Groups	N	Mean	SD	CR	Sig. or Not Sig.
Boys	30	40.30	5.93	0.072	Significant
Girls	30	40.40	4.73	0.072	Significant

Where,

M₁= Mean of First Group

M₂ = Mean of Second Group

σ₁= Standard Deviation of First Group

σ₂= Standard Deviation of Second Group

N₁ = Score of First Group

N₂ = Score of Second Group

Fig-4.2.5-Graph showing mean, SD of Retention in Traditional Classroom teaching

By analyzing Mean of Boys group on traditional classroom is 40.3 and Mean of Girls group is 40.40. The Standard Deviation for student of Boys group 4.73 and Girls group is 5.93.For df value 58 of t or CR at 0.1 levels the table value is 1.67 and calculated value is 0.072 which is less than the table value the H_0
(5) is accepted

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

The findings of the study are grouped as follows:

· Achievement in Social Science of Control Group and Experimental Groups

· Attitude towards the use of smart classroom of Experimental Groups

· Attitude towards Social Science of Experimental Groups

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH:

By virtue of the experience of this study, the investigator would like to put forward the following suggestions for the future study.

1. A longitudinal study may be carried out to assess the improvement in the achievement of students.

2. The same study may be conducted with different experimental design.

3. The same study may be conducted by comparing the achievements with respect to educational objectives.

4. The same study may be conducted by comparing the levels of achievement such as high, average and low.

CONCLUSION:

It is evident that the aspect of smart classrooms is a positive move in the education system. It has in a great way facilitated the learning process through the utilization of the various media that allow better understanding since some aspects could be better understood using a certain media as opposed to the other.

REFERENCES:

1. Abica, J.C, and Valentine, C. (1991). Gender difference in creative achievement: A survey of exploration genetic. Social and General Psychology Monograph, 117(3), 63.

2. Adelman, H.S., and Taylor, L. (1997). Classroom Climate. In S.W. Lee, P.A. Lowe, and E. Robinson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of School Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Saga Publications.

3. Alessi, S. M, and Trollop S. R. (1985). Computer-based instruction: Methods and development. New Jersey : Prentice Hall.

4. Balanskat, A., and Blamire, R. (2007). ICT in schools:Trends, innovations and issues in 2006-2007. European Schoolnet. Retrieved December 15, 2008, from

5. http://insight.eun.org/ww/en/pub/insight/misc/specialreports/ict_in_schools_.htm

6. Chaudhary, V. (2004). A Comparative study of urban and rural high school boys and girls in relation to creativity. Indian Psychological Abstracts and Reviews, 11(2),17-19.

7. Gerber, S. (1996). Extracurricular activities and academic achievement. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20(1), 42-50.

8. Jordan, D. (2002). Smart Classrooms. Retrieved from http://profj.info/smartclassrooms.

9. Samuelsson, J. (2008). The impact of different teaching methods on students ‘arithmetic and self regulated learning skills. Educational Psychology in Practice: Theory, Research and Practice in Educational Psychology, 24(3), 237-250.

10. Trow (1960). Academic achievement. In Dandapani (Ed.), A Text Book of Advanced Education Psychology (pp. 384). New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers.

11. Young-Joo Jeon 2016, ‘How to Improve the Construction and Layout of Smart Classrooms for Teaching English’, International Journal of u- and e- Service, Science and Technology, vol.9, no.2, pp.41-48.

12. Zahra Taleb and Fatemeh Hassanzadeh 2015, ‘Toward Smart School: A Comparison between Smart School and Traditional School for Mathematics Learning’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol.171, pp. 90-95.

Received on 04.10.2021 Modified on 19.11.2021

Res. J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2022;13(1):25-28.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5828.2022.00005