Academic journal article International Journal of Education and Management Studies

A Comparison of Intelligence Quotient, Study Involvement, Adjustment and Parental Involvement between High Achievers and Low Achievers

Academic journal article International Journal of Education and Management Studies

A Comparison of Intelligence Quotient, Study Involvement, Adjustment and Parental Involvement between High Achievers and Low Achievers

Article excerpt

The implications of children's early academic achievement on their future life events like the type of job, health, life satisfaction and the academic outcomes of their progenies have been well documented (Easterlin, 2001; Murrell, Salsman & Meeks, 2003; Subasi & Hayran, 2005). However, the most definitive influence is on their proximate academic achievement. The inverse relationship between demand and supply in the domains of higher education and job opportunities has amplified the significance of school education inexorably. Given the established importance and its pervasive influence, a nuanced understanding of academic achievement has become an essential imperative.

Though earlier researchers in the area do not contest the multidimensional nature of academic achievement, the general orientation in the quest for the predictor variables of academic achievement was tilted towards the demonstration of the link between cognitive abilities and academic achievement (Karbach et al., 2013; Song et al., 2009; Colom & Flores-Mendoza, 2007; Rohde & Thompson, 2006; Dhall & Thukral, 2005; Farsides & Woofield, 2003; Neisser et al., 1996). Nonetheless, contradictory findings were also reported (Kulkami, Pathak, & Sharma, 2010; Habibollah et al., 2008; Furnham, Chamorro-Premuzic, & McDougall, 2003). These inconsistencies set the exploration and identification of additional dimensions to the already expanding constellation of noncognitive predictor variables on full throttle. A sample of the popular noncognitive factors reported in literature comprises personality (e.g., Laidra, Pullmann & Allik, 2007); parental involvement (e.g., Lopez, 2011; Guolaug Erlendsdottir, 2010; Topor et al., 2010; Chad Nye, 2006); study habits (e.g., Crede & Kuncel, 2008); attitudes (e.g., Lipnevich et al., 2011); academic discipline (e.g., Duckworth & Seligman, 2003); study involvement (e.g., Lee et al., 2011; Wang & Holcombe, 2010; Sobrocco, 2009); social skills (e.g., Robbins et al., 2006); emotional intelligence (e.g., O'Connor & Little, 2003; Parker et al., 2004; Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2009; Song et al., 2010; Mavroveli & Sanchez-Ruiz,2011), adjustment (e.g.,Ye!laiah, 2012; Adhiambo, Odwar, & Mildred, 2011 ; Gupta & Gupta, 2011 ; Balboni & Pedrabissi; Chen, Rubin, & Li, 1997; Carlson et al., 1996), etc. While previous studies that have attempted to identify factors cognate to academic achievement have enquired from multiple vantage points, studies have rarely attempted to combine both cognitive and noncognitive variables in their investigations and much less - compared high achievers and low achievers.

Discerning this gap in research, the present study is an endeavorto examine academic achievement in the light of cognitive (intelligence), motivational (study involvement), emotional (adjustment) and environmental (parental involvement) factors in conjunction by juxtaposing high achievers and low achievers in a sample of school children. The primary objective is to capture the differences in the manifestation of the four chosen variables between the two groups and identify the key factor(s) that delineate high achievers and low achievers. With insights drawn from the review of literature, the study hypothesized that higher psychometric indices on the facilitative factors, viz. intelligence, study involvement and parental involvement will be obtained by the high achievers and indicate better adjustment as a group vis-à-vis low achievers.



The sample comprised of students from classes VII to X from a Kendriya Vidyalaya School in Puducherry. Having obtained the official permission from the school principal, selection of the participants was done by approaching the respective class teachers to nominate ten students as High Achievers and ten students as Low Achievers from their classes based on the criterion defined by the researchers. Only five students were nominated from classes where the total strength is less than fifty. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.