Hi Annie, Ellie, Sybille, and Victoria!

I really enjoyed learning about your study, especially as someone who is studying to become a teacher! That is so exciting to find that a classrooms environment is a significant predictor of academic cheating. I am curious now to see how these results from college aged students would compare to studying internal and external factors influencing elementary aged students inclination to cheat, such as fourth and fifth grade students. I wonder if the younger students would be more influenced by student-teacher dynamics as they are with their teachers way more frequently than college aged students are. Just a thought! Thank you for sharing!!

This study was extremely interesting! The results that classroom environment is a predictor of academic cheating is fascinating. The fact that there is also an interaction between student goals and student-teacher dynamic is something to consider. Being in the education program this is important to consider. Thank you and great job!

Hello!
Nicely organized presentation. Your description of the measures was very clear, and I enjoyed learning about your research. I’m curious about your analysis. Was it a multiple regression analysis? If so, how did you enter the variables? Were all the variables entered as predictors at the same time? Were subscales looked at individually for the measures that had them? In the graph that you show, it appears that you have divided your continuous IVs into grouping variables. If so, how did you do that? For example, did you use a median split? (Or maybe that graph showing a slope analysis for your interaction?)

As a stats professor, I had a couple of questions about your analyses. Most importantly, both of the Fs you reported as significant were less than 1. It’s not possible for an F less than 1 to be statistically significant, so go back to your output and double check that you reported the appropriate value for F. Also, make sure to state what analysis you conducted (e.g., ANOVa v. multiple regression) and why the df were decimals (e.g., did you violate an assumption and use some type of correction). Finally, when you report your statistical analyses, make sure to report both the significant and non-significant (not “insignificant”) values. If you run it, then you report it!

This study is very interesting and well done. As a future teacher, this is very impactful in how we view our classrooms and what may need to be worked on if we find our students cheating on a regular basis. As it was mentioned in another comment about the younger elementary grades and how this would pan out – I also have an interest in how our inclusion classrooms would fit into this study in what is the most important factor there.

Hi! I found this presentation very interesting especially since we are back in person this year. I was intrigued to find out if your hypothesis were true because I would assume that the higher the positive variables the less likely one would cheat. I liked how your group planned out how you would improve the project if you were to do further research. I would also be interested in how the data would change if the questions were applied to only online zoom classes during covid.

This was a great topic! I enjoyed learning about your research. Its interesting to see how classroom environment plays a role in the willingness to cheat. I wonder how the transition back to in-person has affected academic dishonesty, as it seemed to be a big issue with online learning. Overall, this was a great presentation. Thank you for sharing!

Well done everyone. If you had to choose one facet of your study that was the most severe in its capacity as a limitation, what would it be?