The Term Random Sample - Essay Example

Full s Statistics 1st Nov Project 3 This paper provides answers to question 9, 10, and 11. Question nine assumesthat a random sample of 300 students was taken to determine the attitude of all ISU students towards smoking on campus. Question ten and eleven uses the same size but focuses on the attitude of students towards cheating. In this question a questionnaire was used with five options of; strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree. The sample of three hundred students will represent what happens in the whole population of ISU students. Part One a. Define the term random sample A random sample has been defined by Babbie as the sample chosen among many samples by a method that involves an unpredictable factor (211). Samples are subjects chosen from a specified population for investigation purposes in statistics. A random sample has also been defined as the sample in which every component of the whole population has an equal opportunity of being selected (Black 220). b. Describe the process and takes you will take to collect the data in such a way to actually take a random sample Babbie describes the process of random sampling as the basic sampling method assumed in nearly all statistical computations (211). The process and steps that will be taken to collect data in such a way to actually take a random sample include: 1. Establishing a sampling framework drawn from the population. This framework is used to represents the population and findings from it will be used as an assumption of what actually takes place in the whole population. 2. Numbering the members of the population, for example if we want a random sample of three hundred people from a population of eleven thousand, we number the people from one to nine hundred and eighty. After the numbering our task shall be to select a simple random sample of 300 people out of the population totaling 11,000, 3. Determining the number of digits needed in the random numbers that have been selected and selecting the elements of the sample using random numbers. 4. The simple random numbers can either be automatically collected using a computer if the sampling frame is in a machine-readable format like a CD-ROM or magnetic tape. 5. After the selection we shall have our random sample and the elements or units it contains. Part Two A survey was undertaken to determine the attitude of undergraduate ISU students towards cheating. This section provides the summarized data and analysis. From the survey conducted seventy one out of the ninety-seven students would major if offered through the college of business. This represents 73.2% of the student population out of 26.8% who would not major if offered through the college of business. Out of the students interviewed thirty three were female and sixty four were male. This represented a ratio of 34.02% to 65.98% of female to male students. Out of this population, fifty-three students representing 55.79% admitted that they had taken at least one distance education course. The other 44.21% admitted that they had not. The analysis for questions five to seventeen is provided in the table below:     Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree q5 Believe instructors typically take sufficient steps to prevent cheating in the classroom 16.49% 55.67% 17.53% 9.28% 1.03% q6 believe a student in one of my classes has been caught cheating 16.49% 21.65% 17.53% 21.65% 22.68% q7 believe student cheating hurts the reputation of the university: 20.62% 32.99% 23.71% 14.43% 8.25% q8 believe a student caught cheating should be expelled 5.15% 17.53% 24.74% 34.02% 18.56% q9 believe instructors typically take cheating very seriously 48.45% 38.14% 8.25% 1.03% 4.12% q10 have had a student try to copy my answers 22.68% 28.87% 16.49% 16.49% 15.46% q11 believe students caught cheating are given a severe penalty for cheating 26.80% 40.21% 19.59% 9.28% 4.12% q12 Seeing a student cheat really doesn’t bother me 13.40% 31.96% 30.93% 16.49% 7.22% q13 believe there is less cheating in college than there was in high school 28.87% 32.99% 13.40% 15.46% 9.28% q14 believe there is more cheating in distance education classes than in a classes offered in a classroom 27.37% 25.26% 29.47% 12.63% 5.26% q15 would like to see penalties implemented for students caught cheating 3.13% 30.21% 47.92% 6.25% 12.50% q16 believe if it was known that I.S.U. takes cheating as a very serious offense it would help the reputation of I.S.U. graduates 21.05% 41.05% 25.26% 6.32% 6.32% q17 believe that a student who cheats in college is more likely to cheat at their job than a student who does not cheat in college 21.05% 37.89% 13.68% 18.95% 8.42% Table 1.1 Analyses Q5 to Q17 Chart 1.1 analyses of students behavior towards cheating From the table 1.1 and chart 1.1, it is evident that more than 55% of the students agree that instructors take sufficient action to prevent cheating in class. About 48% also strongly agree that instructors take cheating in classroom very seriously. Another forty percent also agree and believe that students caught cheating is given a severe penalty for their cheating acts. About forty-seven percent are neutral whether they would like to see penalties implemented for students caught cheating. 41.05% of the students slightly agree that if it was known that I.S.U. takes cheating as a very serious offense it would help the reputation of I.S.U. graduates. Another 37.89% also agree that students who cheat in college are more likely to cheat at their job than fellow students who do not cheat in college. 22.68% of all the students interviewed do not believe that students have ever been caught I in their class cheating. 34% strongly disagree that expulsion should be used as a form of punishment to students found cheating. 30% of the interviewed students are neutral whether seeing their fellow students cheating really affects them. a. Construction and interpretation of confidence intervals for assigned questions Confidence intervals have been defined as the range of values within which a population parameter is estimated to lie (Babbie 206). Total sample size (n) 173 Sample Mean (x) 1.783505155 Number Counted 97 Sample Standard Deviation (s) 1.165715125 Confidence level (1-a) 0.95 Level of significance (a) 0.05 Standard error (SE)=s/sqrt(n) 0.08862768 critical probability (p*):p*=1-a/2 0.975 degrees of freedom (df):df=n-1 172 Margin error (ME) 0.17370706 critical value 1.96 confidence interval from 1.957212215 confidence interval to 1.609798094 Table 1.2 Construction of confidence levels From the results in table 1.1 above, we can be 95% confident that the mean average of the population undergraduate students in relation to cheating is 1.783 plus or minus the margin error, 0.1737. b. Construction of confidence intervals using actual data and examination of attitudes of males and females Q10 Q11 Q4 Total sample size (n) 173 173 173 Sample Mean (x) 2.73196 2.23711 0.68041 Number Counted 97 97 97 Sample Standard Deviation (s) 1.388310303 1.077933941 1.046287004 Confidence level (1-a) 0.95 0.95 0.95 Level of significance (a) 0.05 0.05 0.05 Standard error (SE)=s/sqrt(n) 0.105551278 0.0819538 0.079547728 critical probability (p*):p*=1-a/2 0.975 0.975 0.975 degrees of freedom (df):df=n-1 172 172 172 Margin error (ME) 0.206876703 0.160626496 0.155910682 critical value 1.96 1.96 2.96 confidence interval from 2.938835466 2.397739898 0.836323053 confidence interval to 2.52508206 2.076486906 0.524501689 Table 1.3 Construction of confidence levels using actual data From table 1.3 above, we can be 95% confident that the mean average of the male and female student population in relation to cheating 2.731 and 2.237 plus or minus the margin errors 0.10555 and 0.08195 respectively. We can also be 95% confident that the mean average of the distance education student population in relation to cheating is 0.6804 plus or minus the margin error 0.1559. c. Statement of research hypothesis This research looked at a number of issues related to cheating among college students. A more appropriate research hypothesis would be to find out if cheating affects the reputation of the university, of the student, and of the student’s ability to perform effectively in the work place. The hypothesis statements would be as follows; 1. Alternate hypothesis: Cheating affects the reputation of the university, the reputation of the student, and the ability of the student to perform effectively in the workplace. 2. Null hypothesis: Cheating does not affect the reputation of the university, the reputation of the student, and the ability of the student to perform effectively in the workplace. d. Summary of findings From the data collected, it is evident that more than thirty percent of the students interviewed agree that cheating affects the student’s reputation, the university’s reputation, and the ability of the student to perform effectively at the work place. Students believe that instructors often take sufficient steps to ensure cheating does not take, and the act of cheating itself affects the reputation of the university. This is evident by their response that severe penalties have been melted down on those who have been caught cheating. This fact is also strengthened by the belief held by the students that students caught cheating should be punished severely. About fifty percent of the interviewed students also desire to see penalties implemented for the students who have been caught cheating. In conclusion, random samples are those chosen among many samples by a method that involves an unpredictable factor. These samples are subjects chosen from a specified population for investigation purposes in statistics. From the sample used in this paper, 73.2% of the student population would not major if offered through the college of business, 65.98% were male and 55.79% admitted that they had taken at least one distance education course. In relation to cheating, more than thirty percent of the students agreed that cheating affects the student’s reputation, the university’s reputation, and the ability of the student to perform effectively References Babbie, Earl. The Practice of Social Research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2010. Print. Black, Ken. The Basics of Social Research. Belmont, CA: Thomas Higher Education, 2008. Print. Read More