The objectives of the study were: (1) To develop self learning modules in geography as a subject at 10+1 level in arts stream. (2) To study the effectiveness of self learning modules in geography in terms of achievement. (3) To study whether the students belonging to below average, and above average intelligence differ in achievement of geography. (4) To study whether the student’s study habits affect achievement in geography or not. (5) To study whether there is any interaction among mastery/non-mastery teaching strategies, intelligence and study habits.

The hypotheses of the study were: (1) There will be significant difference in the mean achievement scores of the students in respect of mastery and non mastery classes. (2) There will be significant difference between mean scores of students having different levels of intelligence. (3) There will be significant difference between mean achievement in geography of students of good study habits and poor study habits. (4) There will be no significant interaction between mastery/non-mastery teaching strategies and intelligence. (5) There will be no significant interaction between mastery/non mastery teaching strategies and study habits. (6) There will be significant interaction between intelligence and study habits. (7) There will be significant interaction among mastery/non mastery teaching strategies, intelligence and study habits. 

Five self-learning modules in geography were developed by researcher. The data were analyzed by skewness and Kurtosis, t-test and ANOVA technique. 

Pre-test post-test 2x2x2 factorial design was used by researcher.

The data were analyzed by skewness and Kurtosis, t-test and ANOVA technique. 

The findings of the study were: (1) Students taught through Mastery Teaching Strategies attained more Geographic concept than the students taught through Non-mastery Teaching Strategy. So Mastery Strategy proved more superior to Non-mastery Strategy in teaching Geographic concepts. (2) Students possessing high level of intelligence scored higher than students with low level of intelligence. (3) Study habits acted as redundant factor. Students having good study habits or poor study habits performed equally well. (4) Students with high intelligence scored more than students with low intelligence under Mastery Teaching Strategy group, whereas no such differences was found under Non-mastery Teaching Strategy. Intelligence affected achievement in Mastery Strategy but not in Non-mastery Strategy. (5) Students with low intelligence gained much more in Mastery Teaching Strategy group as those in Non-mastery group. So high achievement was attributed to Mastery Teaching Strategy. (6) Students with high intelligence achieved more in Geography in Mastery Teaching Strategy group as compared to Non-master Group. (7) Students with high level of intelligence did better in attaining Geographic concepts than low intelligence students. (8) Students with high intelligence gained more concepts under Mastery Teaching Strategy than students with low intelligence under Non-mastery Strategy. (9) Both high intelligent as well as low intelligent groups gained significantly under Mastery Learning Approach.