Search

Academic frauds, dishonesty and cheating are pervasive in Pakistan, but thus far less systematic research has been undertaken on the effectiveness of the policies designed for countering academic dishonesty. Generally, the success of a policy depends on a good design and appropriate implementation. The design aspect of the policies to counter academic dishonesty in Pakistan is studied elsewhere, the purpose of this article is to empirically examine the implementation stages of the same policies. In doing so, the study utilizes a panel data set comprising of 60 cross-sections and 06 time series observations (2012–2017). Results of the rigorous panel regression models shows that leniency in the prescribed punishments and an exhaustive belief on the efficacy of traditional examination surveillance methods are counterproductive. The study however failed to substantiate the direct relationship of discrimination and academic dishonesty in the sample. It is therefore concluded that prescribed punishments must be awarded in letter and spirit and that there is need for coordination at different stages of the implementation. Further, the study also recommends that traditional forms of examination surveillance must be augmented using modern technology.

This study investigated faculty attitudes towards student violations of academic integrity in Canada using a qualitative review of 17 universities’ academic integrity/dishonesty policies combined with a quantitative survey of faculty members’ (N = 412) attitudes and behaviours around academic integrity and dishonesty. Results showed that 53.1% of survey respondents see academic dishonesty as a worsening problem at their institutions. Generally, they believe their respective institutional policies are sound in principle but fail in application. Two of the major factors identified by faculty as contributing to academic dishonesty are administrative. Many faculty members feel unsupported by their administration and are reluctant to formally report academic dishonesty due to the excessive burdens of dealing with paperwork and providing proof. Faculty members also cite unprepared students and international students who struggle with language issues and the Canadian academic context as major contributors to academic dishonesty. This study concludes with recommendations for educators and recommendations for future research.

Student academic dishonesty is a pervasive problem for universities all over the world. The development of innovative practices and interventions for decreasing dishonest behaviour requires understanding factors influencing academic dishonesty. Previous research showed that personal, environmental, and situational factors affect dishonest behaviour at a university. The set of factors and the strength of their influence can differ across countries. There is a lack of research on factors affecting student dishonesty in Russia. A sample of 15,159 undergraduate students from eight Russian highly selective universities was surveyed to understand what factors influence their decision to engage in dishonest behaviour. Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) was employed to explain dishonest behaviour among students. The explained variance in the engagement in academic dishonesty equals 48% in the model for the full sample, and reaches 69% in the model for one of the considered institutions. The major findings of this study were: (1) subjective norms appeared to dominate as the strongest predictor of academic dishonesty across the Russian universities; (2) perceived behavioural control, appeared to be positively related to the dishonest behaviour. In the majority of universities, this factor was found to be insignificant. This finding indicates a specific feature of Russian students’ an ethical decision-making process discussed in the last part of the paper.

A large body of research has indicated international students in the United States (U.S.) and abroad experience difficulties understanding what academic integrity is and how to avoid academic misconduct (Bista To Improve The Academy, 30(1), 159–172 2011; Brown & Howell, 2001; Gullifer and Tyson Studies in Higher Education, 39(7), 1202-1218 2014). While most studies focus on academic misconduct and academic corruption in research ethics (Macfarlane et al. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 339-358 2014), this study analyzes the length, English-language readability, and translation of academic integrity policies of 453 four-year U.S. institutions of higher education. Findings indicate average academic integrity policies are over 2000 words long, are written above the 16th-grade reading level, and are very rarely translated into a language other than English (0.06% of the sample). In addition, no institutions published their academic integrity policies in full on their institutional international student website, possibly rendering the policy difficult to locate on the institution’s website for international students. Implications for research, policy, and practice are addressed.

The current study extends previous literature regarding the effectiveness of learning about academic integrity through peer instruction by assessing the impact of a peer instructional approach for actual and perceived learning gains over time. One trained residence don provided one interactive 30-min presentation covering four major aspects of academic integrity and misconduct (i.e., definition, detection, consequences, and importance of academic integrity) to groups of undergraduate students. In total, 192 participants attended the workshop and were surveyed for their knowledge of academic integrity immediately before the presentation, immediately after the presentation, and after a four week delay. Perceptions regarding the presentation also were assessed. Consistent with previous literature, results indicate perceived learning gains and preference for having an interactive presentation delivered by a residence don. In addition, actual gains in knowledge were found immediately after the presentation and gains remained evident over a four-week delay. Outcomes suggest that peer instruction is a viable and effective approach for educating students about academic integrity.

For over 70 years, research has tackled the issue of academic misconduct in the university setting. However, a review of the literature reveals that (a) consensus on the magnitude of such behavior has not been reached, and, (b) no one with expertise in quantitative methodology has attempted to classify the behaviors that describe cheaters until Ferrell and Daniel proposed the use of the Academic Misconduct Survey (AMS). Even they, following their 1995 study, made a call for the development of understandable constructs in the measurement of cheating. Seventeen years later, the present study sought to produce such constructs. In a series of three phases of data collection, 4,100 participants completed a revised version of the AMS. A factor solution containing five factors proved to be the most interpretable. The five factors are as follows: creative padding, interactive cheating, false personal excuses, taking credit for others’ work, exam cheating. The present paper outlines the constructs proposed and discusses implications in this area for (1) scholars within the area of measurement and (2) educators with regard to student accountability and performance.

A controlled experiment was conducted with a cohort of graduate accounting students, which involved a mild form of deception during a class ethics quiz. One of the answers to a difficult question was inadvertently revealed by a visiting scholar, which allowed students an opportunity to use the answer in order to maximise test scores and qualify for a reward. Despite an attempt to sensitize students prior to the test to the importance of moral codes of conduct, a high incidence of cheating was reported. Students who took the opportunity to cheat were more condoning of the behaviour compared to control group members and this difference in attitudes was consistent regardless of the intensity of the issue specified in the survey. The cognitive dissonance associated with the academic dishonesty is believed to reveal behavioural orientations that reflect conscious and unconscious desires to alleviate the discomfort associated with the behaviour by attempting to condone it. This inappropriate behaviour appears to attract students professing no religious faith and is significantly influenced by the reported level of religious commitment.

Every semester, professors in every discipline are burdened with the task of checking for plagiarized papers. Since plagiarism has become rampant in the university, it can be argued that devoting time to checking for plagiarism is nothing more than a fool’s errand. Students will continue to plagiarize regardless of the consequences. In this paper, I will argue that professors do have a categorically binding obligation to confirm whether papers have been plagiarized. I will use Onora O'Neill’s account of “principled autonomy” as the foundation for my argument. Moral agents can only act on principles that can be adopted by all. Dishonesty cannot be adopted since honesty would cease to exist. Furthermore, failing to check for plagiarized papers is a failure to treat all students and professors and ends-in-themselves.

Publicly available information indicates that the collapse of the high-profile corporations during the recent past were due to the unethical actions of a number of major players, including high level managers in those corporations. These examples of the ethical misdeeds of corporate actors have influenced accounting professional bodies and academic institutions around the globe to revisit the issue of ethical training of business and accounting students—the corporate managers of tomorrow. However, little is known about the ethical perceptions of business and accounting students, and business academics are finding it challenging to develop and promote ethics-based accounting and business curricula. This study addresses the research gap. It explores the ethical perceptions of accounting and business students in two Australian universities using three paradigms, that is, whether there are differences between regional and metropolitan, male and female, older and younger accounting students with respect to their ethical perceptions. Empirical evidence provided in this study suggests that while there are no differences in ethical perceptions of the regional and metropolitan accounting and business students, female and older students are found to be more ethical compared to male and younger students.