STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

1/15

1.RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

Time Management is of the essence that the things one does are consistently

productive and efficient all throughout a certain period of time. It is the act or process

ofplanning and exercising conscious control over the amount of time spent on specific

activities, especially to increase effectiveness, efficiency or productivity (Wikipedia, 2013).The aim of managing time is to spend time doing the things that help achieve ones goals

and the things that one personally prioritize and value (Oxford Brookes University, 2012).

In this study, the time management of student officers will be measured by the Time

Management Questionnaire, specifically their score in the test. On the other hand, in

academic performance, the Quality Point Index (QPI) the student officer gets at the end of

each semester while also being active in an organization is also being considered.

Students involvement in extracurricular activities is generally considered

advantageous to their overall educational experience (Astin, 2001). This is because aside

from being clothed with academic and plain classroom learning, students also enhance

their communication skills; learn about professional development issues, and group

dynamics (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). This study basically aims to measure the Time

Management Practices of Student Officers: their Time Planning, their Attitude toward Time

and the things that distract them with their plans and goals. Also, the Pickle Jar Theory is

evident in this study. The Pickle Jar, being filled with large rocks, followed by pebbles, sand

and finally water. This time management theory then states that the pickle jar is life, the

large rocks its major responsibilities, the small pebbles hobbies, the sand mundane

activities and the water distractions. While the pickle jar theory focuses on identifying what

is important, it also draws attention to the impact that distractions can have (Dave, 2012).

Furthermore, because the respondents are primarily students, their academic

performance is being noted and considered through determining their respective QPI as a

further indicator and support of good time management. Determining the optimal amount

of involvement in student organizations has implications for educators and student affairs

professionals (Keeling, 2004). The extent to which students are actively engaged in the

college experience can have either a positive or a negative effect on academic success

(Community College Survey of Student Engagement, 2008; Holland & Andre, 1987). To

determine this, one must understand how involvement affects students both in and out of

the classroom. The dilemma becomes to what extent students can be involved in extra-curricular activities without those activities becoming detrimental to the students QPI

(Kiger & Lorentzen, 1988).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planninghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectivenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectivenesshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

2/15

2.STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM, HYPOTHESIS, STATISTICAL TOOL

Research Problem Hypotheses Statistical Tool

1. What are the time management

practices of Student Officers in

XU?

Hypotheses Free Descriptive Statistics

- Means- SD

2. What is the profile of the

respondents in terms of:

- Academic Performance

(QPI)

- Term of Service

- Gender

-

Study Load- Leisure Time

Hypotheses Free Descriptive Statistics

- Frequency

- Percentage

- Mean

3. Does the Time Management

Practices of Student Officers

affect their Academic

Performance (QPI)?

H1: The Time

Management Practices

of Student Officers

affect their Academic

Performance.

H0: The Time

Management Practices

of Student Officers does

not affect their

Academic Performance.

Regression

3.RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This includes the method of research used, the participants of the study, data

gathering procedure and the statistical treatment of the study.

3.1 Research Sample, Participants of the Study and Data Gathering Procedure

This study will use a universal method of data gathering. This is a take-all method.

The aimed respondents for this study are Student Officers of Xavier University Ateneo de

Cagayan (XU-ADC), provided that he or she meets the following guidelines: (1) he or she

must be a student officer, whether appointed or elected, (2) he or she must be an officer of

any organization in XU-ADC , whether co-curricular or extra-curricular, and (3) he or she

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

3/15

must be an active officer of an organization with at least one year of administrative term of

service. The process was done through giving a permission letter to the Head of Student

Activities and Development (SACDEV) Office asking a formal consent to conduct the survey

to the student officers. After the letter of proposal was approved by the said office, few

suggestions were also given by the office before the survey can be officially conducted.

As suggested, the researchers made a personal letter addressed to each co-

curricular and extra-curricular president a formal asking for permission to conduct the

survey and at the same time asking for help to provide the researchers the intended

respondents the study is aiming to have, who is, someone who meets the aforementioned

criteria or guidelines. This made the distribution of the questionnaires and gathering of the

expected data easier than planned. Attach to the questionnaire as a front page is the

informed consent for the respondents with the particular demographic profile to be filled-

up.

3.2 Psychometric Properties of the Scales Used

The 35-item Time Management Questionnaire (TMQ), originally by Britton, Bruce K.

and Tesser, Abraham (1991) were tested for reliability and validity by Sema Alay and

Settar Koak last December, 2002 (27 items). Time management instrument measures

several time management components; choosing goals and sub goals, prioritizing the goals,

generating tasks and subtasks from goals, prioritizing the tasks, listing the tasks on a "to

do" list, scheduling the tasks, and then carrying out the tasks. From the study done, they

found 3 dimensions namely: Time Planning, Time Attitudes and Time Wasters. The Time

Planning Dimension has 16 items, Time Attitude, 7 items and Time Waster, 4 items.

Furthermore, total score on TMQ ranged from 47 to 123 with a mean of 86.68 and a

standard deviation of 13.21. 27-item TMQ developed to measure time management

practices of university students has 5-point Likert scale. Responses under each item consist

ofalways, frequently, sometimes,infrequentlyand never. In scoring, 5 point was assigned to

answer "always" at positive items, and 1 point was assigned to answer "always" at negative

meaning items. Higher values on the TMQ correspond to better time management

practices. The reliability of Time Management Questionnaire was addressed by using

Cronbach alpha. The Table shows the reliability of Time Management Questionnaire for

361 selected university students.

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

4/15

Scales Number of ItemsCoefficient Cronbach alpha

N=361

Time Planning

Time Attitudes

Time Wasters

Total Scale

16

7

4

27

0.88

0.66

0.47

0.87

Cronbach Alpha coefficients or internal consistency for three subscales of TMQ for selected

361 university students was ranged from .47 (Time Wasters) to .88 (Time Planning) .In

additions to that, Cronbach alpha for total scale was .87.

4. RESULTS

Table 4.1 The Time Management Practices of Student Officers in XU

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Overall Time Management

Score

100 75.00 119.00 96.7100 10.74901

Valid N (listwise) 100

The original mean of the study conducted was 86.68 with a standard deviation of

13.21. From the results obtained, the mean was 96.71, 10.03 higher than the original mean

with a standard deviation of 10.75, 2.46 lower than the original standard deviation. Thissuggests that the results obtained had a mean seemingly higher but was not enough to

yield a high average mean. The mean score of 99.89(from adding 86.68 with the standard

deviation 13.21) would have yielded a high average score.

Table 4.2 The Demographic Profile of the Respondents

Statistics

Gender Length of

Service(In

Years)

Leisure Time(In

Hours)

Study Load QPI

NValid 100 100 100 100 100

Missing 0 0 0 0 0

Mean 1.5100 2.2300 3.7250 21.8600 2.8601

Median 2.0000 2.0000 3.5000 22.5000 2.8750

Std. Deviation .50242 .88597 2.18971 4.85761 .46512

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

5/15

Minimum 1.00 1.00 .00 12.00 1.60

Maximum 2.00 6.00 10.00 36.00 3.90

There are a total of 100 respondents, the gender of the respondents got a mean of

1.5100, the length of service of the respondents got a mean of 2.2300, the leisure time of

the respondents got a mean of 3.7250, the study load of the respondents got a mean of

21.8600, and the QPI of the respondents got a mean of 2.8601.

Gender

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Male 49 49.0 49.0 49.0

Female 51 51.0 51.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

There are a total of 100 respondents, 49% are males and 51% are females.

Length of Service(In Years)


Percent

Valid

1.00 17 17.0 17.0 17.0

2.00 53 53.0 53.0 70.0

3.00 22 22.0 22.0 92.0

4.00 7 7.0 7.0 99.0

6.00 1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Out of 100 respondents, 53% have served for 2 years, 22% have served for 3 years,

17% have served for 1 year, 7% have served for 4 years, and only 1 percent has served for

6 years.

Leisure Time(In Hours)


Percent

Valid

.00 10 10.0 10.0 10.0

1.00 2 2.0 2.0 12.0

1.50 2 2.0 2.0 14.0

2.00 7 7.0 7.0 21.0

2.50 3 3.0 3.0 24.0

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

6/15

3.00 25 25.0 25.0 49.0

3.50 3 3.0 3.0 52.0

4.00 17 17.0 17.0 69.0

4.50 2 2.0 2.0 71.0

5.00 11 11.0 11.0 82.0

5.50 2 2.0 2.0 84.0

6.00 7 7.0 7.0 91.0

6.50 1 1.0 1.0 92.0

7.00 1 1.0 1.0 93.0

8.00 4 4.0 4.0 97.0

10.00 3 3.0 3.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Of the 100 respondents, 25% of them have 3 hours of leisure time, 17% of them

have 4 hours of leisure time, 11% of them have 5 hours of leisure time, 10% of them have

dont have leisure time, 7% of them have 6 hours of leisure time, 4% of them have 8 hours

of leisure time, 3% of the respondents have 10 hours of leisure time, another 3% have 3.5

hours of leisure time, some other 3% have 2.5 hours of leisure time, 2% of them have 5.5

hours of leisure time, other 2% of them have 4.5 hours of leisure time, another 2% of the

respondents have 1.5 hours of leisure time, and another 2% have 1 hour of leisure time, 1%

of the respondents have 7 hours of leisure time and another 1% of the respondents have

6.5 hours of leisure time.

Study Load


Percent

Valid

12.00 4 4.0 4.0 4.0

14.00 1 1.0 1.0 5.0

15.00 8 8.0 8.0 13.0

16.00 1 1.0 1.0 14.0

17.00 7 7.0 7.0 21.0

18.00 11 11.0 11.0 32.0

20.00 3 3.0 3.0 35.0

21.00 14 14.0 14.0 49.0

22.00 1 1.0 1.0 50.0

23.00 7 7.0 7.0 57.0

24.00 14 14.0 14.0 71.0

25.00 3 3.0 3.0 74.0

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

7/15

26.00 7 7.0 7.0 81.0

27.00 5 5.0 5.0 86.0

28.00 7 7.0 7.0 93.0

29.00 6 6.0 6.0 99.0

36.00 1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

For a total of 100 respondents, mostly of them have a 21 to 24 units of study load,

14% of them have a study load of 24 units, and another 14% of the respondents have a

study load of 21 units. Also, there are 1% of the respondents have a study load of 36 units,

another 1% of the respondents have a study load of 22 units, another 1% of the

respondents have a study load of 16 units, and another 1% of the respondents have a study

load of 14 units,

Table 4.3Relationship between the Respondents Time Management Practices and their

Academic Performance (QPI)


Mean Std. Deviation N

QPI 2.8601 .46512 100


Score

96.7100 10.74901 100

Correlations

QPI

Overall Time

Management

Score

Pearson Correlation QPI 1.000 .230


Score

.230 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) QPI . .011


Score

.011 .

N QPI 100 100


Score

100 100

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

8/15

Variables Entered/Removedb

Model

Variables

Entered

Variables

Removed Method

1 Overall Time

ManagementScore

. Enter

a. All requested variables entered.

b. Dependent Variable: QPI

ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 1.138 1 1.138 5.498 .021a

Residual 20.280 98 .207

Total 21.418 99

a. Predictors: (Constant), Overall Time Management Score


Coefficientsa

el

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

95.0% Confidence Interva

B Std. Error Beta Lower Bound Upper

(Constant) 1.896 .414 4.580 .000 1.074


Score

.010 .004 .230 2.345 .021 .002

ependent Variable: QPI

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

Change Statistics

Durbin-Watson

R Square

Change

F

Change df1 df2

Sig. F

Chang

e

1 .230a

.053 .043 .45490 .053 5.498 1 98 .021 1.646

a. Predictors: (Constant), Overall Time Management Score


7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

9/15

Coefficient Correlationsa

Model

Overall Time

Management

Score

1 Correlations Overall Time ManagementScore

1.000

Covariances Overall Time Management

Score

1.809E-5

a. Dependent Variable: QPI

Collinearity Diagnosticsa

Model Dimension Eigenvalue Condition Index

Variance Proportions

(Constant)

Overall Time

Management

Score

1 1 1.994 1.000 .00 .00

2 .006 18.140 1.00 1.00


Residuals Statisticsa

Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation N

Predicted Value 2.6436 3.0824 2.8601 .10721 100

Residual -1.14331 1.09672 .00000 .45260 100

Std. Predicted Value -2.020 2.074 .000 1.000 100

Std. Residual -2.513 2.411 .000 .995 100


The tables showed that the correlation strength is a weak positive (r= .230). It

means that Time Management Practices is directly proportional to the students Academic

Performance(QPI) and also showed a significant relationship (p=.021). Statistics show that

the Pearsons correlation value (.053) signifies that the Time Management Practices only

accounts for 5.3% of the Students Performance. Since it only accounts for 5.3% there are

also other variances that account the remaining 94.7% of the Students Performance.

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

10/15

Table 4.4 The Factors that Directly Affects the Academic Performance of the Student Officers.


Mean Std. Deviation N

QPI 2.8601 .46512 100

Total Time Planning Score 56.5300 8.75532 100Total Time Attitude Score 26.6100 2.62427 100

Total Time Waster Score 13.5700 2.38791 100

Correlations

QPI

Total Time

Planning Score

Total Time

Attitude Score

Total Time

Waster Score

Pearson Correlation QPI 1.000 .225 .207 -.015

Total Time Planning Score .225 1.000 .228 .380

Total Time Attitude Score .207 .228 1.000 -.006

Total Time Waster Score -.015 .380 -.006 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) QPI . .012 .019 .440

Total Time Planning Score .012 . .011 .000

Total Time Attitude Score .019 .011 . .476

Total Time Waster Score .440 .000 .476 .

N QPI 100 100 100 100

Total Time Planning Score 100 100 100 100

Total Time Attitude Score 100 100 100 100

Total Time Waster Score 100 100 100 100

Variables Entered/Removeda

odel Variables Entered Variables Removed Method

Total Time Planning Score . Stepwise (Criteria: Probability-of-F

enter = .100).

Dependent Variable: QPI

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

11/15

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 2.184 .299 7.303 .000

Total Time Planning Score .012 .005 .225 2.287 .024


Excluded Variablesb

Model Beta In t Sig.

Partial

Correlation

Collinearity

Statistics

Tolerance

1 Total Time Attitude Score .164a

1.639 .104 .164 .948

Total Time Waster Score -.118a

-1.109 .270 -.112 .856

a. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Total Time Planning Score


The tables showed that the correlation strength is a weak positive (r= .225). It

means that the Time Planning Factor is directly proportional to and greatly affects the

students Academic Performance(QPI) and also showed a significant relationship (p=.024).

Model Summaryb

odel R R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

Change Statistics

R Square

Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Ch

.225a

.051 .041 .45550 .051 5.229 1 98

Predictors: (Constant), Total Time Planning Score

ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 1.085 1 1.085 5.229 .024a

Residual 20.333 98 .207

Total 21.418 99

a. Predictors: (Constant), Total Time Planning Score


7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

12/15

Statistics show that the Pearsons correlation value (.051) signifies that the Time

Management Practices only accounts for 5.3% of the Students Performance. Since it only

accounts for 5.1% there are also other variances that account the remaining 94.9% of the

Students Performance. In general, the total Time Management Practices is significantly

affecting the students academic performance, but among the three factors of Time

Management presented, Time Planning greatly affects and contributes to the students QPI

compared to the other factors.

5. DISCUSSION

Since the mean score obtained falls only on the average, the time management

practices of Student Officers in XU would have an average time management score. One

student officer, a student not only focuses on his or her academics but also in his or her

extra-curricular involvement. Involvement includes attending organization meetings andevents. Some students choose to become leaders within their organizations. Leadership

ranges from active participation, chairing specific projects or committees, to acting as

president or vice-president (McGrath, 2002). Students must balance course

responsibilities, extracurricular activity, along with home, family, and friends (Astin, 2001).

Student officer status within an organization promotes even greater duties and time

commitment to the already active individual (Holland & Andre, 1987). Provided with this,

student officers tend to have more responsibilities and additional priorities from time to

time because of the said involvement. It is like indirectly saying that the more priorities, the

more things to set and organize for management, the lesser the time they can possibly give

and spare to each particular priorities.

In this study, the Time Management was measured by dividing it to three categorical

factors: Time Planning, Time Attitude and Time Wasters. Generally, the aforementioned

factors are really significantly contributing to the academic performance of the student

officers provided that the set of questions was indeed relevant and practical to them. In

planning and attitude, a task list is being used. Task list (also to-do listor things-to-do) is a

list oftasks to be completed, such as chores or steps toward completing a project. It is

an inventory tool which serves as an alternative or supplement to memory (Wikipedia,

2013). In general, time management was tried to be measured through written process of

schedules set for a certain period of time.The Validity and Reliability of Time Management Questionnaire (Sema A. & Settar

K., 2002) got an average mean of 86.68 and a standard deviation of 13. The average

obtained from the study was 96.71 with a standard deviation of 10.75 which is slightly

above the mean of the original study. Given that the respondents of the aforementioned

study were college students, it is like implying that when the same questionnaire with the

same scoring procedure was used for this research, Time Management of Student Officers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Task_(project_management)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Task_(project_management)

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

13/15

of Xavier University, then the total score of the student officer respondents was actually

above average than that of the score got by the ordinary college students of the original

study. This is because additional priorities were considered aside from academic

responsibilities, like having extracurricular and organizational involvements with

corresponding tasks, considering also the weight of the demands the student officer

encounters and obliged to do than those that are managed by ordinary students.

In relation to finding out if Time Management Practices would affect academic

performance, Britton and Tesser (1991) tested their hypothesis that college grade point

averages could be predicted by time management practices. They had ninety freshman and

sophomore college students at the University of Georgia answer a 35-question time

management survey and submit their SAT scores. They found that two time management

components directly affect the cumulative GPA; planning including utilizing short and

long term goals -- and time attitudes, or, the perception of how their time needs to be spent.

Students that practiced both planning and positive time attitudes found that they had much

more time to complete their tasks because they felt more in control of how their time wasspent therefore knowing when they had to say no to activities. It was also found that the

students who reported using goal-oriented time management had a higher overall GPA.

This seems to indicate that time management practices do have an influence on college

academic achievement, but thats not all they affect.

Time management practices have been proven to be some of the top indicators

toward achieving a high level of academic success and per formance. They arent the only

influences on achievement, but time management also doesnt serve only one purpose

(Delinger, 2012). Participating in events and being engaged in other outside-class work, not

necessarily a job, but being active in organizations also has a strong correlation to reaching

a high GPA. And time management practices lead not only to a high level of academic

performance, but to good health and lower levels of stress (Delinger, 2012).

Through this study the data suggests that time management practices do have an

influence on academic performance. College students who are involved in extracurricular

activities are forced, by the nature of their schedules, to manage their time better than

those not involved. And those that are involved, proved to have a higher overall academic

performance, as well as a higher desire to perform well. The desire to perform well could

be a result of their competitive character that has transferred from their activities. Results

from Britton and Tesser (1991) are parallel to the findings of this study. Students who felt

more in control when scheduling their tasks reported a higher academic performance level,as well as the relationship between time attitudes and confidence and their performance

level. Another similarity among studies is that this and a study conducted by Pierce (2007)

suggest that those involved in extracurricular activities perform better. Pierce concluded

that athletes were able to apply their concentration and desire to achieve from athletics to

their academics. There are still a lot of factors that can affect students academic

performances. Factors that affect academic achievement include their level of intelligence.

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

14/15

Social factors can greatly impact the academic achievements of children as well. Some

social factors that should be monitored include aspiration levels, academic inclination, peer

relations, social class, and home conditions.

6. CONCLUSION

Time Management is simply a plain term but comes with corresponding

consequences: it is just a matter of Hows and Whats; how one manages his or her time

and what are the respective outcomes of the particular management. It is either good or

bad, right or wrong. But the aforementioned labels do not come with the person managing

the time as sole basis; it is still in the outcome that this label can be evident and that the

management of time can be measured. Also, a good and efficient time management

requires skill and appropriate attitude. It sets not just priorities but also major

responsibilities. This comes from a decision, from a choice and from a plan. And most of all,

one chooses to carefully manage his or her time because of the objective of achieving

certain sets of goal in a given period of time.

In this study, time management showed a significant contribution to the academic

performance of a student officer of XU. But this relationship is not directly proportional

since there are student officers who got high scores on the Time Management Test (TMT)

but is only Fair achiever (QPI of 2.5) while some have a poor score in the TMT but is a Good

achiever (QPI of 3). It can therefore be concluded that the relationship between the two

variables being presented indeed help the researchers to confirm that there are unexplored

factors that might affect the students academic performance aside from their time

management and extracurricular involvement which are not contained within the studys

scope. Because in the end, it is not time one is exactly managing, it is actually the self.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

From the finding and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations are

hereby presented.

1. To future researchers. That they would come up with a related study to explore theother factors affecting the relationship between time management and students

academic performance (QPI) by considering the other measures and demographic

variables not included in this study and utilize a bigger number of sample to widen

and increase the generality of findings.

7/27/2019 STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

15/15

2. To the moderators of each organization. It is recommended that further studies be

commenced to find out factors that affects the Student Officers time management in

order to develop and be equipped student officers in terms of managing their time.

8. REFERENCES

Delinger, Jamie C. (2012). The Effects of Time Management on College Students Academic

Performance. Retrieved from

http://firstyearcomposition.weebly.com/uploads/8/7/2/6/8726689/denlinger_en

g_104_time_management_study.pdf

Sema, A., and Settar, K. (2002). Validity and Reliability of Time Management Questionnaire.

Retrieved from http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/200222SEMA%20ALAY.pdf.

Time Management - Meaning and its Importance. (n.d.).

Retrieved from http://www.managementstudyguide.com/time-management.htm

Definition of Time Management. (n.d.).

Retrieved from http://www.free-time-management-tips.com/definition-of-time-

management.html

Time management Oxford Brookes University. (n.d.).

Retrieved from http://www.brookes.ac.uk/student/services/health/time.html

The Pickle Jar Theory: How To Prioritize Your Time. (n.d.).

Retrieved from http://www.time-management-success.com/pickle-jar-theory.html

Time management - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (n.d.).

Retrieved October 4, 2013, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_management

Garland, A. M. (2010).ASSESSING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STUDENT INVOLVEMENT

AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION.
http://www.managementstudyguide.com/time-management.htmhttp://www.free-time-management-tips.com/definition-of-time-management.htmlhttp://www.free-time-management-tips.com/definition-of-time-management.htmlhttp://www.brookes.ac.uk/student/services/health/time.htmlhttp://www.time-management-success.com/pickle-jar-theory.htmlhttp://www.time-management-success.com/pickle-jar-theory.htmlhttp://www.brookes.ac.uk/student/services/health/time.htmlhttp://www.free-time-management-tips.com/definition-of-time-management.htmlhttp://www.free-time-management-tips.com/definition-of-time-management.htmlhttp://www.managementstudyguide.com/time-management.htm

STAT PAPER (10.3.13)

Documents

Transcript of STAT PAPER (10.3.13)