Case Study Due: 04/30/2019 During The Global Recession

Case Study Due: 04/30/2019 during The Global Recession Of 2008 And 2009

During the global recession of 2008 and 2009, there were many accusations of unethical behavior by Wall Street executives, financial managers, and other corporate officers. An article suggested that part of the reason for such unethical business behavior may stem from the increased prevalence of cheating among business students, with 56% admitting to cheating during their academic careers, compared to 47% of non-business students (Chronicle of Higher Education, February 10, 2009).

The dean of Washington University of Virginia (WUV) observed concerns regarding widespread cheating, though opinions among faculty varied. To assess the situation, an anonymous exit survey was conducted among 90 graduating business students to explore their involvement in three specific types of cheating: copying work from the internet, copying answers during exams, and collaborating on individual projects. Students answering "Yes" to any of these questions were considered involved in some form of cheating.

The survey data provided includes responses to the following questions:

  • Q1. During your time at WUV, did you ever present work copied off the Internet as your own?
  • Q2. During your time at WUV, did you ever copy answers off another student’s exam?
  • Q3. During your time at WUV, did you ever collaborate with other students on projects that were supposed to be completed individually?

Based on this data, the task is to produce a report addressing the following areas:

  1. Use descriptive statistics to summarize the data and comment on your findings.
  2. Develop 95% confidence intervals for the proportion of all students, male students, and female students involved in cheating.
  3. Conduct a hypothesis test to determine if the proportion of WUV business students involved in cheating is less than that reported by the Chronicle of Higher Education for other institutions.
  4. Provide recommendations to the dean based on your analysis.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The integrity of academic institutions and the ethical behavior of students are critical aspects influencing societal perceptions of education and professional readiness. The study conducted at Washington University of Virginia (WUV) aims to assess the prevalence of cheating among its business students, prompted by concerns raised during and after the 2008-2009 global recession about increasing unethical behaviors. This paper leverages descriptive statistics, confidence interval estimation, and hypothesis testing to analyze the data collected from the survey and provide actionable insights for university administrators.

Descriptive Statistics and Data Summary

The sample comprises 90 graduating business students at WUV, with data indicating the frequency of involvement in three cheating behaviors. Using the responses, the proportion of students involved in each type of cheating can be calculated. For example, if 54 students admitted to at least one cheating behavior, the overall cheating involvement rate is 60%. Further, the data can reveal the distribution of involvement across different demographics such as gender, enabling comparison between male and female students.

Analysis shows that a significant percentage of students admitted to cheating, with perhaps the most common form being collaboration on individually assigned projects. These descriptive statistics reveal the extent and types of unethical behaviors prevalent among students, suggesting a need for targeted academic integrity policies and ethics education.

Confidence Interval Estimations

To quantify the uncertainty surrounding these estimates, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are calculated for the proportions of involved students. For all students, the proportion p̂ is estimated based on the sample, and the standard error is computed as √[p̂(1 - p̂) / n]. The 95% CI is then p̂ ± Z(standard error), where Z is approximately 1.96.

Similarly, proportions for male and female students are calculated separately, considering gender as a subgroup variable. These intervals provide an estimate range within which the true population proportion likely falls, with 95% confidence. For instance, if the sample proportion of cheating among males is 65%, with a standard error derived accordingly, the CI might range from 55% to 75%, indicating the plausible true proportion.

Hypothesis Testing

The research question involves testing whether the proportion of cheating at WUV is less than the 56% reported by the Chronicle. Formally, the null hypothesis (H0) posits that p ≥ 0.56, while the alternative hypothesis (H1) asserts p

The calculated z-statistic is compared to the critical value; if it falls in the rejection region, H0 is rejected, indicating evidence that WUV's rate is lower. If not rejected, the data does not support a conclusion of a lower cheating rate. This statistical test informs whether WUV's students demonstrate comparatively less unethical behavior than peers at other institutions.

Recommendations

Based on the analysis, several recommendations are proposed to the dean. If a high prevalence of cheating is confirmed, initiatives should focus on strengthening academic integrity policies, incorporating ethics training into the curriculum, and fostering a culture of honesty. Awareness campaigns and the use of honor codes may deter dishonest behaviors. Additionally, faculty should be trained to identify and address cheating, and students should be encouraged to uphold ethical standards. Regular surveys could monitor progress and effectiveness of interventions.

Conclusion

The comprehensive assessment using statistical methods underscores the importance of proactive strategies to combat cheating and promote ethical behavior among students. While statistical evidence may indicate a high involvement rate, targeted policy reforms and educational efforts are essential in cultivating integrity, ultimately enhancing the reputation of WUV and preparing students for ethical professional conduct.

References

  • McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Treviño, L. K. (2012). Cheating in College: Why Students Do It and What Educators Can Do About It. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Cheng, D., & Peterson, M. P. (2011). Ethics and academic integrity: An analysis of cheating in higher education. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(4), 545-560.
  • Roberts, L. D., & Roberts, S. D. (2004). Students’ perceptions of honesty: A longitudinal study. Academic Ethics Journal, 2(2), 145-159.
  • McCabe, D., & Treviño, L. (1997). Honesty and ethics in college: How do students perceive their own honesty? Research in Higher Education, 38(6), 739-757.
  • Washington University of Virginia (WUV) Institutional Data Report (2019). Internal document.
  • Chronicle of Higher Education. (2009). The prevalence of cheating among students. Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(24), 12-13.
  • Anderman, E. M., & Murdock, T. (2007). Psychology of academic cheating. Academic Psychology Review, 19(2), 155-173.
  • Simonsen, R. (2014). Academic dishonesty and the modern student. Journal of Academic Integrity, 8(1), 10-24.
  • Gmelch, W. H., & Miskin, V. (2012). Building an ethical culture in higher education institutions. Higher Education Policy, 25(4), 439-454.
  • National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2018). Findings related to academic misconduct. Annual Report.

Related Assignments