When looking at the numbers of our table we can notice that the students who copied answers off another student's exam have the highest proportion of 0.53. This is makes sense, because it is the old-fashioned way of cheating and is easy especially when someone borrows a term paper or homework from a friend.
The second biggest proportion includes the students who collaborated with other students on projects that were supposed to be completed individually. This is another easier way of cheating, because students “justify” their cheating by maybe thinking that they need to collaborate with other students as a way learning the subject matter better. And finally, the least approved method of cheating is copying work off the Internet, which is 0.43.
…show more content…
A. 95% confidence intervals for the proportion of all students, the proportion of all male students, and the proportion of all female students who were involved in some type of cheating. To form a confidence interval on a population proportion, we generally use Z a/2. To get this value in Excel we will use NORMSINV(1-a/2) , where 1-a/2 is the area in tail (http://home.business.utah.edu).
Involved in Cheating X Proportion Lower Limit Upper Limit
Students Involved in Cheating 81 0.90 0.8380 0.9620
Males Involved in Cheating 40 0.44 0.3418 0.5471
Females Involved in Cheating 41 0.46 0.3527 0.5584
B. 95% confidence intervals for the proportion of all students, the proportion of all male students, and the proportion of all female students who were involved in copying off the Internet is provided in the following table.
Copied from Internet Lower Limit Upper
…show more content…
Null hypothesis. The null hypothesis, denoted by H0, is usually the hypothesis that sample observations result purely from chance. In this case, according to null hypothesis there is no significant difference between business students at Rocky University who were involved in cheating and business students elsewhere.
Alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis, denoted by H1 or Ha, is the hypothesis that sample observations are influenced by some non-random cause. Proportion of business students at Rocky University who were not involved in some type of cheating is less than the proportion of all business students elsewhere.
We will use Excel formula GETPIVOTDATA to extract data from our pivot table, and find out x̅ or p-hat, which is the sample proportion (Blackwood, 2014).
Proportion of all business students at Rocky University who were not involved in some type of cheating, are as follows: p1 = 0.1 (9/90).
Proportion of all business students at Rocky University elsewhere are as follows p2 = 0.9
Cheating has become very normal to students on tests or quizzes. Students don’t consider the consequences of cheating on a test (Source A). If you just walked into a classroom, most probably you would see students cheating on their classwork or quizzes. Measures should be taken to reduce the amount of cheating on tests or quizzes
Short Answer Writing Assignment – Both the calculated binomial probabilities and the descriptive statistics from the class database will be used to answer the following questions.
The student data file was used as the data source. The sample size included one hundred men and one hundred women. Thirty-five out of one hundred men had not declared for a degree. Fifteen out of one hundred women had not declared for a degree. The level of
8. Assume that the MM207 Student Data Set is a random sample of all Kaplan students; estimate the proportion of all Kaplan students who are male using a 90% level of confidence.
Over the years, cheating does not carry the same stigma it used to represent. Because of competition and expectations, students are doing whatever it takes to achieve an A average. There are students who are fighting for scholarships or for the position to be on the top. Also, parents and teachers are the root cause of this matter because they have advocated the idea that high GPAs will lead to more successful futures. As a result, grades have become the main focus for most students,
The customers in this case study have complained that the bottling company provides less than the advertised sixteen ounces of product. They need to determine if there is enough evidence to conclude the soda bottles do not contain sixteen ounces. The sample size of sodas is 30 and has a mean of 14.9. The standard deviation is found to be 0.55. With these calculations and a confidence level of 95%, the confidence interval would be 0.2. There is a 95% certainty that the true population mean falls within the range of 14.7 to 15.1.
To find the 95% of the men’s scores you would again use the formula:. The Mean=52.53 and the SD=30.90. These scores were found on pg. 134 in table 2 column labeled Male in the pain category.
17 out of 22 students had a GPA of 3.0 or higher from a scale of 1.0-4.0 (there were
The three most common violations of cheating are, copying ideas or facts from another’s paper during an examination, engaging in an unauthorized collaboration with another student on tests and obtaining or providing preciously undisclosed test questions or information pertinent to an exam that has not yet been administered. I believe that these three are the most common violations because all three has two students that are doing the cheating. For an example, two friends are in the same class, and one friend decided not to study for the test, so she asks her friend for help. The help turns into cheating because the friend is assisting her with the answers. These are the most cheating violations because as friends, we want to have each other
Females: 41.7 / 73.6 = 0.566576 = 56.7 %. The pass score of 56.7% shows that there is evidence of adverse impact: 62.5 / 77.7 = 0.8043758 = 80.4%. The pass rate which is 80.4% indicates that there is no evidence of adverse impact.
H1/HA – Alternative Hypothesis: a statement you want to prove (E.g Average is not 50)
Many researchers have indicated that cheating is a serious problem on campuses (Bowers, 1964; Engler et al., 2008; Gallant, 2008; Leming, 1978; McCabe, Trevino, & Butterfield, 2001). Studies completed by Bowers (1964) and McCabe and Trevino (1996) revealed nearly identical results regarding student-cheating behavior despite the 30 year time span; both studies identified that
The confidence interval for proportion of business students of bayview University who cheat is some form is 0.43 to 0.63.
What I regard as cheating is considered OK by many American university students — one survey revealed that as many as 75% of the interviewed students had purchased essays, term papers or even their masters theses from other
It is evident from table no. 1, that majority of the sample among OC category students i.e. 48% are average and in the remaining more than half of the sample 39% are high and a