Many estimates of soil quality index (SQI) assumed to be similar in their measurement have been suggested across the world. This assumption needs to be proved through comparison of various methods. This study therefore aimed at comparing two quantitative SQIs determined by Soil Management Assessment Framework (SMAF) and Relative Soil Quality Index (RSQI), in two rice – intensive cultivation local government areas (Katcha and Gassol) in Nigeria. A semi-detailed soil survey was conducted and seven modal profile pits dug. Soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis of selected indicators. Data were subjected to quantification using SMAF and RSQI procedures, and results subjected to correlation analysis. Based on SMAF, SQI are 66.75 – 84.3 % in Gassol and 55.9 – 77.65 % in Katcha. With RSQI, 68.06 – 73.03 % in Gassol and 66.14 – 81.84 % in Katcha. Positive correlation occurs between them (r = 0.68 in Gassol and 0.74 in Katcha) indicating that both methods are similar in assessing soil quality. However, in computation RSQI is less subjective because the values for scoring and relative weights were calculated rather than experts’ opinions used in SMAF. Therefore, RSQI is consistent even with different researchers, thus is more reliable.
Not All Numerical Data Leads To Quantitative Research: Introduction to [Qualitative] Quantification Analysis (Published)
Very often we face a situation where a student has collected numerical data and (s)he does not know what the research method (s)he uses really is. The purpose of this paper is to explain the difference between quantitative research and [qualitative] quantification. The description of the quantification method is based on our own experiences and a descriptive literature review. We explain in which cases a qualitative quantification analysis should be done. The practical aim of this paper is to help both the student and the supervisor to identify the correct method for analysing numerical data.
The study seeks to investigate the effect of a good knowledge of mathematical concept of area on the quantification and estimation of tiles in a building construction. To achieve the purpose of this study, one null hypothesis was formulated. An experimental design was adopted for this study. A Sample of ten (10) tillers who attained primary education was collected from a building construction site. This was divided into two groups of five (5) tillers each, the experimental group tillers taught with mathematics concept of area) and the control group (tillers taught area without mathematics concept of area). The instrument for data collection was workers ability on quantification and estimation test (WAQET), with reliability index of 0.87. The hypothesis was tested using the independent t-test analysis at p>O.O5 level of sigi4flcance, the result showed a mean score of (10. 09) of the experimental group which was higher than the mean score of (8.02) for the control group. The analysis reveals that tillers who had a good knowledge of mathematical concept of area were better in quantification and estimation of tiles.