surroundings, 3. Feeling respect towards human dignity, 4. Conservation and Preservation of Life, 5. Treatment and Diagnosis of Bioethical Dilemmas. The variables used were: discipline, punctuality, behavior, responsability, homework, studying habits, and class participation. In the punctuality criterion the students with more than 9 absents were excluded from the study, allowing a 15 minutes delay. Referring to discipline, it was demanded to the students follow the school ruler. in behavior, have a good attitude to work in class, such as participation, and interaction with the teacher, answering questions and show interest on class. The study habits, developing topics in house to be shown on class. A daily evaluation of the topic. This variables were measured using a numerical scale with the following values: Good (1), Regular (2), Poor (3). The group control did not receive any bioethics concepts but the same variables were evaluated.
All the variables were evaluated throughout the semester of August-December 2002 once a week, taking the first and the last evaluations to make the statistical comparison between both groups. The independence tests were carried out using X2 for each variable. The hypothesis we are trying to prove are: Ho: the aspect to be evaluated and independent of the group( homework, discipline, behavior, responsibility, punctuality, class participation, study habits) . it is independent of the group( experimental and the control group). Against the Ha alternative: there is a dependence of the evaluating aspect( study habits, discipline, behavior, etc.) with the group( experimental and control)
The statistical evidence found was not significant in the punctuality, homework, study habits, responsibility, and class participation aspects to deny the independent hypothesis in all but one of the evaluated variables. Only the variable of behavior showed a significant difference of 9.3%.
Each variable was evaluated based in the following hypothesis: “The evaluated variable is independent of the group being tested” vs. “There is a relationship between the variable and the group being tested”. No level of significance was predetermined given the social nature of the test.
Based in this hypothesis, the study showed there was a relationship between the variable evaluated and the group. The error percent of saying there is a relationship between behavior and the group being evaluated when there is none, equals 0.093. Assuming there is always this error percent, the experimental group showed a regular behavior vs. the control group (85.7% vs. 14.3%).