unfair tests or of being superhard grades. Students must be challenged, not overwhelmed. Reducing anxiety on tests also decreases cheating. Kibler and Eble(1988) suggested that the pressure of any one test can be reduced by giving numerous quizzes or tests. Equal access to test files reduces the urge to cheat on the part of those without access. Access to the professor for help and a help session immediately before the test makes the course seem fairer and help reduce pressure. Open book exams, test with equation handouts or key relations charts help to reduce pressure and eliminate the use of illegal cheating sheets.

Berget (1995) cited that by providing students with a larger emotional vocabulary, a more advanced ability to connect basic emotions to personal experiences, a more advanced understanding of emotional cues, and more con?dence that they can manage their feelings are essential to the development of positive students-teacher relationships. Students-teacher relationships, and the student-teacher interactions that promote them, might also be the speci?c target of intervention in professional development efforts involving teachers. Teachers can learn speci?c strategies and techniques that will help them form more supportive relationships with all students in their classroom.

ChapterIII

Methodology

3.1 Introduction

In this chapter, the researcher identifies the practical aspect of research. The readers need to know as much details as possible about what has been done.

3.2 Design

The next question that a reader can expect to be informed of, includes logistical issues related to what actually was done. In this study, the researcher quantitatively found the relationship between teacher-student rapport and students’ willingness to cheat through two questionnaires in rapport and cheating in English classes of Iranian high school students in Bandar Abbas, with an average age level of between 17-18. First an oral warm up stage was done in order to engage the students in the whole area of concern and instructions were orally presented to the them in Persian. Then, the teacher gave them two questioners. One about rapport between teacher and students with 10 questions and another about students’ willingness to cheat with 12 questions. These questionnaires were provided by researcher and have piloted by a psychology professor Dr. Khamesan and finally they were verified by the advisor. In order to understand the relationship between rapport and cheating, teacher asked students to fill rapport questioners first, and then cheating questions. After 30 minutes teacher collected the questioners and compared them with each other to find whether there is a logical relationship between them. Based on the research questions which did not deal with the relationship between two variables (rapport and cheating). Finally, the data was collected through questionnaires and analyzed by using descriptive statistics including mean, standard deviation, correlation coefficient and nonparametric ANOVA. Thus, this study is descriptive and comparative.

3.3 Participants

The participants in this study included a sample of 115 students learning English language (EFLs) at Shahid AliYas High School in Bandar Abbas, Iran, with native language of Persian. They were females ranging in age from 17-18 years old. It should be noted that theses students did not need any placement test, because they were all seniors in high school, and they had been classified according to English curriculum at school.

3.4 Instruments

To determine whether there is a relationship between teacher-student rapport and student’s willingness to cheat, two instruments were used in this study, namely cheating questionnaire and rapport questionnaire.

3.4.1 Rapport and cheating questionnaires

For providing these questionnaires, students were given some questions. After collecting the data, these questionnaires were piloted by a psychology professor Dr. khamesan then, they were verified by an advisor. The rapport questionnaire consists of 10 items that measure the degree of whether there is any relationship between teacher and students. Each item ranges from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Strongly agree item indicated that students have good relationship with their teacher and strongly disagree indicated that students do not have any relationship with their teacher. Next, the cheating questionnaire consists 12 items that measures the degree of whether there is any kind of cheating between students. Each item ranges from never to always. The answer never indicated a student’s integrity and the answer always indicated student’s cheating. In order to estimate the reliability of these instruments, internal consistency of the test was computed based on Cranach’s Alpha. Result revealed the reliability value of 0.842.

0.842.

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach’s Alpha

Items

N of Items

.842

.838

12

3.5 Data collection procedure

The participant in this study included a sample of 115 students learning English language (EFLs) at Shahid Aliyas High School in Bandar Abbas, Iran. They were fameles ranging in age from 17-18 years old. It should be noted that these students did not need any placement test, because they were all senior in high school and they were classified according to English curriculum at school.

3.6 Data analysis procedure

After collecting the data, the questionnaires were scored according to the relationship between teacher-student rapport and student’s willingness to cheat. SPSS software version 18 was used to analyze the data. The results gained from the two tests fell within the interval data, so the Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient was used to calculate the correlation between these two tests.

Chapter VI

Data analysis and

Results

3.7 Introduction

In this chapter, a descriptive analysis of quantitative data is presented based on the research questions of the study. After collecting data, researcher uses SPSS soft ware to analyze the data. In generally, statistic ways include descriptive statistic and deductive statistic. In descriptive statistic, researcher uses frequency and graphs table to describe data. And In deductive statistic section, researcher analyzes data with confirming or refusing hypnosis. In this study 115 students were selected who were all female.

1-4) Descriptive statistics:

In this section, for each of the research question using appropriate tables we describe the collected data.

Participants’ field of study

Table 1 Major

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

English

45

39.1

39.1

39.1

Math

3

2.6

2.6

41.7

Science

67

58.3

58.3

100.0

Total

115

100.0

100.0

In table 1, of the total participants, the majority (58.3 percent) were experimental filed students and the minority (2.6 percent) were math students.

Students’ GPA:

Table 2Table average

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

11/99

2

1.7

1.7

1.7

13/99

15

13.0

13.0

14.8

15/99

1

.9

.9

42.6

17/99

36

31.3

31.3

73.9

20-18

30

26.1

26.1

100.0

Total

115

100.0

100.0

Most of the participants (31.3 percent) had an average score from 16-17.99 (out of 20) and a few of them (.9 percent) had an average score from 14-15.99 (out of 20).

The questionnaire’s items

In table 3, each of the questionnaire’s items included 5 options which ranged from strongly disagree (indicated with number 1) to strongly agree (indicated with number 5). The results are shown in this table.

Table 3 Item Statistics

Mean

Std. Deviation

N

x1

2.62

1.166

60

x2

2.55

1.156

60

x3

2.57

1.240

60

x4

2.42

1.225

60

x5

2.20

1.117

60

x6

2.68

1.295

60

x7

2.67

1.271

60

x8

1.85

1.117

60

x9

1.77

1.254

60

x10

1.53

.791

60

x11

1.80

1.005

60

x12

1.57

.981

60

Table 3. The second column from the left of the table shows the mean of the responses in terms of the coding system. In the third column, the standard deviation of the codes shows the distribution of responses. The fourth column shows the number of participants.

The flowing shows the results of descriptive statistics for the whole sample and for the whole student-teacher relationship questions.

Now, in table 4 the results of descriptive statistics for the total number of samples and the rapport questions are shown

Table4 Descriptive statistics

rapport

Mean

Median

SD

Rapport1

3.39

4

1.23

Rapport2

3.03

3

1.30

Rapport3

3.45

4

1.16

Rapport4

3.44

4

1.22

Rapport5

2.12

2

1.23

Rapport6

3.17

4

1.49

Rapport7

2.81

3

1.32

Rapport8

2.45

2

1.38

Rapport9

4.03

4

1.14

Rapport10

3.08

3

1.39

Table 5 Percentages

rapport

strongly agree

agree

neither agree nor disagree

disagree

strongly