The results showed that the perpetrators mostly used crib materials on paper, ruler and calculator cover.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present study narrated the forms, factors and consequences of cheating in university examinations by Unisa Open and Distance learning students from anecdotal data.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The results showed that the perpetrators mostly used crib materials on paper, ruler and calculator cover.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study provides some recommendations that may provide Registrars of universities with insight to tighten up examination regulations so that the credibility of degrees universities offer is upheld through awarding degrees to deserving students only.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Forms · Factors · Cheating
Abstract
The present study narrated the forms, factors and consequences of cheating in university examinations by Unisa Open and Distance learning students from anecdotal data. The results showed that the perpetrators mostly used crib materials on paper, ruler and calculator cover. The factors that influenced examination cheating were gender, age range and regional locations of candidates. The consequences were monetary fines and suspension periods. The limitation of the study is that inferences are based on documented evidence only without verifications through interviews. The study provides some recommendations that may provide Registrars of universities with insight to tighten up examination regulations so that the credibility of degrees universities offer is upheld through awarding degrees to deserving students only.
MOKULA, L. L. D., LOVEMORE, N. (2014). Forms, Factors And Consequences Of Cheating In University Examinations: Insight From Open And Distance Learning Students. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 4, 259–280. https://ajindex.com/articles/140431
Bashir, M., Afzal, M. & Azeem, M. (2008). Reliability and validity of qualitative and operational research paradigm. Pakistan Journal of Statistics and Operation Research. 4(1), 35-45.
Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Botero, O. L. (2010). Consequences of cheating. Academic Dishonesty, 13. Retrieved on 13 August 2010. Available from http://www.topic-mag.com/edition 13/cheating/anotai.htm Clabaugh, G. K. & Rozycki, E. G. (2009). Preventing cheating sand plagiarism. Orlando, PA: New Foundations Press.
Crown, D. F. & Spiller, M. S. (1998). Learning from the literature on college cheating: A review of empirical research. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 683-700.
Golafashani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606. Hurriyet Daily News 22 September (2010). Experts in Turkey express concern over decentralized exam system. Retrieved on 29 September 2010. Available from http:www.hurriyetdailynews.com Leedy P. D. (1997). Practical research, planning and design (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan. Makhado N. D. (2002). Challenges educators experienced in the provision of Environmental Education at school in curriculum 2005. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Johannesburg. Rand Afrikaans University. Matoke, T. (2010). Teachers protest at cheating. Daily News, 30 September 2010. Retrieved on 8 October 2010.Available at http://www.nation.co.ke.
McMillan, J. H. & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in Education: A conceptual introduction. New York: Addison Wesley. USA. Miti, J. (2010). Cheating in examinations hurting education sector. The Monitor, August. Mukhola, M. S. (2006). Guidelines for an environmental education training programme for street food vendors in Polokwane city. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Johannesburg. University of Johannesburg. South Africa. Orlando News (2010). A high court suspends judges for cheating exams. 26 August 2010.