Suman Kumari Katoch
Page No.: 6436 - 6448
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10318
Suman Kumari Katoch
Page No.: 6449 - 6458
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10319
Rajwinder Kaur
Page No.: 6459 - 6467
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10320
Raysh Thomas
Page No.: 6468 - 6488
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10321
Raysh Thomas
Page No.: 6489 - 6498
Kalaichelvi Sivaraman & Rengasamy Stalin
Page No.: 6499 - 6509
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10323
Sindhu C M & Binoy. K
Page No.: 6510 - 6516
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10324
Sachin B. Shinde & G. K. Dhokrat
Page No.: 6517 - 6520
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10325
Padvi A.T. & Nile U.V.
Page No.: 6521 - 6529
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10326
Balbir Singh Jamwal
Page No.: 6530 - 6537
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10327
Prashant Bhagat & Gopal Krusha Thakur
Page No.: 6538 - 6543
Sachin Saxena
Page No.: 6544 - 6550
Surinder Kaur & Mrs. Rajbir Kaur
Page No.: 6551 - 6564
R. Sambasivarao
Page No.: 6565 - 6570
R. Babu & A. Fathima
Page No.: 6571 - 6576
Usha Kothari, Karanjeet Kaur & Simerjeet Kaur
Page No.: 6577 - 6580
Geeta Shinde
Page No.: 6581 - 6587
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10401
Usha Kothari, Ms. Simerjeet Kaur & Mrs. Karanjeet Kaur
Page No.: 6588 - 6594
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10400
Manish Bhatnagar
Page No.: 6595 - 6601
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10402
B. P. Singh
Page No.: 6602 - 6608
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10403
Geeta Shinde , Madhuri Isave & Indira Shimpi
Page No.: 6609 - 6612
B. P. Singh
Page No.: 6613 - 6619
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10404
Geeta Shinde, Madhuri Isave & Indira Shimpi
Page No.: 6620 - 6623
Meenakshi & Rachna
Page No.: 6624 - 6630
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10405
Anurag Asija
Page No.: 6626 - 6629
Kamal Upreti
Page No.: 6630 - 6633
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10409
Rajeev Kaushal
Page No.: 6634 - 6651
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10410
Keka Varadwaj
Page No.: 6652 - 6657
Lata S. More (Surwade)
Page No.: 6658 - 6662
G. Balaji
Page No.: 6663 - 6667
Mrs. Neetu Khokhar
Page No.: 6668 - 6674
Nisha Chandel & Seema Chopra
Page No.: 6675 - 6682
https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v4i24.10419
Aditya Chhabra, Karanbir Singh & Himalaya Kanwar
Page No.: 6683 - 6686
Javid Maqbool & A. K. Tyagi
Page No.: 6687 - 6695
Karanbir Singh, Aditya Chhabra & Vaibhav Kapoor
Page No.: 6696 - 6722
R.D. Ranadive
Page No.: 6723 - 6727
Ms. Ch. Ratna Kumari
Page No.: 6728 - 6736
Manpreet Kaur
Page No.: 6739 - 6747
Ishfaq Ahmad Ganai
Page No.: 6748 - 6761
Naresh Gandhi
Page No.: 6762 - 6768
Naresh Gandhi
Page No.: 6769 - 6774
Deepa Jain
Page No.: 6775 - 6781
Deepa Jain
Page No.: 6782 - 6793
Siddaraju K.S. & Jayamma H. R.
Page No.: 6794 - 6802
Sushil Kumar Dadhwal
Page No.: 6810 - 6816
Sushil Kumar Dadhwal
Page No.: 6810 - 6816
Mahesh Prasad Tripathi
Page No.: 6817 - 6825
Ranjana Gupta
Page No.: 6826 - 6831
Rekha J. Parlikar
Page No.: 6833 - 6838
Rekha J. Parlikar
Page No.: 6839 - 6845
Nitleen Kaur
Page No.: 6846 - 6852
Kazi Kutubuddin Sayyad Liyakat
Page No.: 6853 - 6861
Rajesh Purohit
Page No.: 6853 - 6857
Varinder Kumar
Page No.: 6858 - 6865
Vijay Dhamane
Page No.: 6866 - 6873
Sushil Kumar Dadhwal
Page No.: 6874 - 6878
Prof. Dhananjay Lokhande & Mr. Sunil Dabhade
Page No.: 6879 - 6885
Neelam Kumari
Page No.: 6886 - 6894
Mrs. Geeta Kundi
Page No.: 6895 - 6903
Sangita Nandkumar Shirode
Page No.: 6904 - 6908
Shobha V. Kalebag
Page No.: 6909 - 6913
Vandana Saraswat
Page No.: 6914 - 6919
Jotsna Mohan Kamble
Page No.: 6920 - 6924
Neerja Asthana
Page No.: 6925 - 6931
Anu Malhotra
Page No.: 6925 - 6936
Pradip Debnath
Page No.: 6937 - 6942
Sujata Karade
Page No.: 6937 - 6942
Geeta Singh
Page No.: 6943 - 6947
Ramesh Bhavisetti
Page No.: 6948 - 6956
Davender Singh Yadav
Page No.: 6957 - 6960
Prasad Joshi
Page No.: 6961 - 6973
Shahid M. Zakaullah
Page No.: 6974 - 6981
Dr. Janaiah Saggurthi
Recived Date: 2017-11-25 | Accepted Date: 2017-11-30 | Published Date: 2017-12-01
Page No.: 6982 - 6986
Dr. Ravi Aruna
Recived Date: 2017-11-25 | Accepted Date: 2017-11-30 | Published Date: 2017-12-01
Page No.: 6987 - 6993
In this research the researcher is going to study the impact of new teaching model “Group Clinical Supervision Model” on teaching skills among in-service teachers. In this present investigation teaching skill is defined as ability of teachers in introducing the lesson , explanation, questioning and reinforcement. A check list for the assessment of teaching skill comprising of 50 items was developed and standardized. A sample of 30 teachers working in various schools comprising of 19 in-service teachers having 0-5 years of teaching experience and 11 in-service teachers having 6-10 years of teaching experience . By using this check list an observation as fourth observation IV is recorded after the exposure of traditional method. After that the GCSM will be exposed to teachers. Three observations are taken after the exposure of GCSM by using this check list as Observation I, II, III. The data collected was analyzed using the values of mean, Standard deviation and “t” values. The results of this study helps to understand how the group clinical supervision model facilitate in-service teachers having 0-5 years of experience and 6-10 years of experience..
Key Words: Clinical Supervision Model, Group Clinical Supervision Model, Teaching Sklls.
Peddinti Nehemiah
Recived Date: 2017-10-27 | Accepted Date: 2017-11-28 | Published Date: 2017-12-04
Page No.: 6993 - 7012
The advantages of composite materials are numerous and well documented. Currently all over the world composite materials have a great role in any kind of manufacturing because of high strength to weight ratio, dimensional stability etc. Many studies were conducted to investigate the impact behaviour of fiber reinforced composites due to the increasing demand of these materials in the automotive, maritime, aviation, infrastructure, military, sport sectors and petroleum. However, in order to obtain new properties, in this study, Papyrus and Glass fibers are hybridized as reinforced materials. Composite materials are often used in environments in which they will suffer impact damage. Impact test is the process applying hammering effect on the work materials, which determines how much mechanical energy is required for the failure. The ability to quantify this property is a great advantage in product liability and safety. The main objective of this research is to find out enhanced hybrid composite material for impact strength of Lake Tana papyrus and glass fiber with polyester Resin. There are different methods to investigate the hybrid composite impact strength. The present research is done by varying the percentage content of the natural fiber for papyrus composite (30%/70%), (20%/80%) and for PGFHC (15%/15%/70%) and (10%/10%/70%) with 70% fixed value of polyester. The other method is by changing the arrangement of the fiber glass and papyrus fibers in unidirectional, woven and random/Chopped/ manner. The Papyrus/Glass fiber hybrid composite is prepared manually by hand lay-up method. Twelve samples were fabricated for each lamina and percentage content. After the samples are manufactured the test pieces are cut according to ASTM E-23 standard. Tests are conducted on IZOD impact testing machine for low velocity. In addition to experimental work, samples were analyzed for equivalent stress with ANSYS. The maximum impact strength is observed for composite with 15 wt% Papyrus fiber loading and unidirectional fiber orientations that is 28.53 kJ/m2 with Equivalent Von-Mises stress 45.403 MPa. Minimum values of impact strength were observed in chopped 30%/70%, which is 18.27 kJ/m2 with Equivalent Von-Mises stress 317.88 MPa.
Kanumalla Raghu Kranti Kumar
Recived Date: 2019-10-07 | Accepted Date: 2017-11-25 | Published Date: 2017-12-04
Page No.: 7013 - 7019
Raja Kumar Pydi & Paturi Samuel Raju
Recived Date: 2017-11-25 | Accepted Date: 2017-11-30 | Published Date: 2017-12-04
Page No.: 7920 - 7929
Radhakrishnan has the rare qualification of being well-versed in the great tradition of both the East and the West. His early education made him familiar with the knowledge of the East particularly of India, and his own scholarly adventure acquainted him with the wisdom of the West. He combined the two traditions with perfect ease, and is able to evolve a philosophy of synthesis. Radhakrishnan’s philosophy has been awarded rare honour of being included in the ‘The Library of Living Philosophers’, together with the philosophy of C.D. Broad, Bertrand Russell, A.N. Whitehead, Albert Einstein, Karl Popper and Jean Paul Satre. Sometimes he is described as nothing more than ‘a liaison officer’ in philosophy between the East and the West (as put it by C.M. Joad). He has also been characterized as a historian of philosophy and not a philosopher himself. Reacting upon this criticism D.P. Chattopadhyaya observes that, rightly understood, the above partial characterization of Radhakrishnan need not necessarily be considered as negative. Chattopadhyaya remarks that he has no hesitation in saying that Radhakrishnan has philosophized in the grand Indian tradition, criticizing his teachers, following them interrogatively and reconstructing them creatively. Any scissors and paste way of characterizing Radhakrishnan would not only be unfair to the thinker, but would also prove inconsistent with the huge corpus of writings he left behind him.
Dr. M. Jyosthana
Recived Date: 2017-11-25 | Accepted Date: 2017-11-30 | Published Date: 2017-12-04
Page No.: 7930 - 7934
The present study aims to investigate the family environment of the secondary school student’s with respect to gender, locality, management and to analyze the relationship between family environment and academic achievement of Secondary school students. The sample consisted or 100 students in Guntur division of Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh. The sample was selected by stratified random sampling method. The researcher adapted the family environment scales developed by Dr. Harpreet Bhatia & Dr. N.K. Chaddha (2002) to collect the data. The results revealed that there is no significant difference in the family environment of boys and girls secondary school students. There is no significant difference in the family environment of rural and urban secondary school students. There is no significant difference in the family environment of government and private secondary school students. There is strong positive relationship between Family Environment and Academic Achievement of Secondary school students.