SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry / 2015 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 4

I Did Cheating, Because : A Phenomenological Study

Kopya Çektim, Çünkü : Bir Olgubilim Çalışması1

MUHAMMET ÖZDEN
Atbüke BAŞTÜRK UÇANSOY
Metin DEMİR
Pages
57–89
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The environmental factors affecting cheating behaviors are instructor s attitudes and behaviors, exam-based evaluation system, the role of courses, peer effect, institutional features and family expectations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of present study is to understand the reasons of pre-service teachers for academic cheating.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The participants were selected by using homogenous sampling strategy and data were collected through in depth interviews from six volunteer pre-service teachers which are a woman and five men.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The environmental factors affecting cheating behaviors are instructor s attitudes and behaviors, exam-based evaluation system, the role of courses, peer effect, institutional features and family expectations.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of present study is to understand the reasons of pre-service teachers for academic cheating. The study used phenomenological design and descriptive phenomenological approach was adapted. The participants were selected by using homogenous sampling strategy and data were collected through in depth interviews from six volunteer pre-service teachers which are a woman and five men. In analysis of the research data, thematic analysis approach was utilized. As a result of the analysis, two themes were constructed to explain the reasons for cheating that are personal factors and environmental factors. The personal factors are comprised of personal characteristics, academic gains and insufficient self-perception. The environmental factors affecting cheating behaviors are instructor s attitudes and behaviors, exam-based evaluation system, the role of courses, peer effect, institutional features and family expectations.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı öğretmen adaylarının kopya çekme davranışlarının nedenlerini incelemektir. Araştırma olgubilim deseni kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiş ve araştırmada betimsel olgubilim yaklaşımı benimsenmiştir. Araştırma katılımcılarını Türkiyenin batısında yer alan bir devlet üniversitesinin eğitim fakültesi öğrencileri oluşturmaktadır. Araştırma verileri 1i kadın 6 öğretmen adayından derinlemesine görüşme tekniği kullanılarak elde edilmiş ve tematik analiz tekniği ile çözümlenmiştir. Verilerin tematik analizi sonucunda katılımcıların kopya çekme nedenlerine ilişkin bireysel etmenler ve çevresel etmenler temaları oluşturulmuştur. Katılımcıları kopya çekmeye yönlendiren bireysel etmenler kişisel özellikler, akademik kazanç sağlama ve zayıf öz yeterlik algısıdır. Çevresel etmenler ise öğretim elemanlarının eylemleri ve özellikleri, sınavlara dayalı sistem ve sınavların içeriği, derslerin içerik yapısı, akranların etkisi, kurumsal özellikler ve aile beklentisi nedenlerinden oluşmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZDEN, M., UÇANSOY, A. B., DEMİR, M. (2015). I Did Cheating, Because : A Phenomenological Study. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 4, 57–89. https://ajindex.com/articles/375660

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Ahmadi, A. (2012). Cheating on exams in the Iranian EFL context. Journal of Academic Ethics, 10, 151-170. doi: 10.1007/s10805-012-9156-5
  2. Akbulut, Y., Şendağ, S., Birinci, G., Kılıçer, K., Şahin, M. C. ve Odabaşı H. F. (2008a). Exploring the types and reasons of internet-triggered academic dishonesty among Turkish undergraduate students: Development of internet-triggered academic dishonesty scale. Computers & Education, 51(1), 463-473.
  3. Akbulut, Y., Uysal, Ö., Odabasi, H. ve Kuzu, A. (2008b). Influence of gender, program of study and pc experience on unethical computer using behaviors of Turkish undergraduate students. Computers & Education, 51(1), 485–492. Alt, D. (2015). Assessing the connection between self-efficacy for learning and justifying academic cheating in higher education learning environments. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13(1), 77-90. doi: 10.1007/s10805-015-9227-5
  4. Ashworth, P., Bannister, P., Thorne, P. ve Students on the Qualitative Research Methods Course Unit (1997). Guilty in whose eyes? University students' perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in academic work and assessment. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 187-203, doi: 10.1080/03075079712331381034 Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research 1(3), 385–405. Ayres, L. (2008). Thematic coding and analysis. L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods içinde (ss. 867–868). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bandura, A. (1986). Social f oundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Behavior içinde (ss. 71-81). New York: Academic Press.
  5. Bernardi, R. A., Baca, A. V., Landers, K. S. ve Witek, M. B. (2008). Methods of cheating and deterrents to classroom cheating: An international study. Ethics & Behavior, 18(4), 373- 391. doi: 10.1080/10508420701713030 Bloor, M. ve Wood, F. (2006). Keywords in qualitative methods. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications. Braun V. ve Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  6. Cizek, G. J. (1999). Cheating on tests: How to do it, detect it, and prevent it. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Coren, A. (2011). Turning a blind eye: Faculty who ignore student cheating. Journal of Academic Ethics, 9, 291-305. doi: 10.1007/s10805-011-9147-y Çilesiz, S. (2011). A phenomenological approach to experiences with tech