DATA RESULTS

This section is separated into the following groups. Total Survey Results shows the results of the entire surveyed population o f freshman boys and girls in the science classrooms at Forest Hills Central High School. Gender Comparisons indicates how the survey responses varied among males and females. Finally, G.PJk.

Comparisons reveals how grade point averages of the students surveyed may have caused a variation in the responses to the survey questions. Analysis o f the survey results yielded the following results.

Total Survey Results

The total number o f freshman science students surveyed which yielded usable data was 147. This represents approximately one half o f the total freshman student population at Forest Hills Central High School. O f those surveyed, 96% agreed that everybody cheats in some way sometime in their lives, with approximately one half (48%) indicating that they have cheated in some way in science class in the past. Bell (1998), had the number o f cheaters at 65%. The most common place cheating is occurring in science class according to those surveyed is homework (50%). These results closely match that o f the work o f Steinberg (1996) in which two-thirds o f the 10,000 high school students studied admitted to cheating on their homework. Lesser amounts of academic dishonesty were occurring on quizzes (12%) and tests (7%), These results are not surprising as there is a greater opportunity to cheat on homewoik than on either quizzes or tests which are much more closely monitored by the classroom teacher. Although the freshman students have not yet taken a high school exam, 8% reported that they may consider cheating on their science exam.

This was encouraging compared to Relin’s (2001), reports where 71% o f the 8,600 students surveyed nationally admitted to cheating on an exam and Bushweller’s (1999), report o f 80% o f 3,123 high school students admitting to cheating on an exam. Bell (1998), reported results that were similar to this thesis' research data. His studies indicated that 75% o f the students thought that it is wrong to cheat on an exam.

Sixty-three percent o f the respondents indicated they had cheated in more than one class this year. McLaughlin & Ross (1989), reported similar results when their research revealed that 55% o f high school students admitted to frequent cheating.

Whereas only 44% said they would cheat in science class in the future, 77% indicated they would probably cheat in another class in the future. This discrepancy is possibly due to the fact that the students were taking the survey in their science classroom which creates a bias in this respect.

The majority o f the students (93%) indicated that they engage in academic dishonesty less in science class this year than they did last school year. This is significant because previous research by Relin (2001), indicates that cheating frequencies usually increase as a student advances through their academic career.

Likewise, Schab (1991), found that academic dishonesty in American schools has increased in each o f the past three decades.

Although most students cheat in high school, less than half (44%) indicated they would probably cheat in college and 28% at their job when they are employed.

However, Bell (1998), suggested earlier that children see their parents making unethical decisions in their social lives and at their place o f employment and that this behavior is perhaps learned by the child and repeated later in life inside and outside the realm o f academics.

Even though 99% o f the respondents agreed that cheating occurs every day in school, 42% indicated that if not done too frequently, it is okay every once in a while.

Also, 69% agreed that teachers should be concerned with academic dishonesty among

the student body. Similarly, McCabe’s (1999), findings were that cheating is a normal part o f life in today’s high schools.

More than one half (55%) agreed that cheating can significantly improve an overall grade in a class and, therefore, 4% agreed and 55% somewhat agreed that cheating on homework in science class is acceptable. Evans & Craig (1990), reported that among the primary reasons for cheating was desire for a better grade. Not surprisingly, only 2% agreed and 14% somewhat agreed that cheating on a quiz was okay, the lowest percentages, 0% and 7%, applying to tests respectively. Cheating appears to be more acceptable in certain situations. What factors may influence this was not the design o f this research.

Sixty-four percent o f the respondents indicated that they are afraid o f getting caught in an unethical act o f academics even after indicating that they would probably cheat again (77%). Seventy-six percent o f the students have not been caught cheating in the past. These findings are similar to Bell’s (1998), research that indicated most students who engage in academic dishonesty are not caught. Similarly, sixty-seven percent o f the students have noticed someone cheating in science class this year, but 98% o f them did not tell the teacher. Earlier, Bell (1998), suggested that perhaps this is a reason why students engage in academic dishonesty in the first place.

Despite any o f the freshman science students’ previous responses, the last survey question revealed that 81% o f all the respondents think that cheating is ethically wrong. Similarly, Bell (1998), found that 87% o f the respondents believe

that honesty is the best policy. Total results of the survey can be found in Appendices I and J.

Gender Comparisons

Boys indicated they cheat more in science class (56%) than did girls (42%).

These results are supported by Stem & Havlicek (1986), whose results indicated that males were more prone to engage in academic dishonesty than were females. This idea held true for quizzes (16% versus 8%) and tests (9% and 6%), also. However, females reported that they cheat more on homework assignments (51%) than did males (49%). Twelve percent o f the male respondents considered the probability of cheating on their science exam versus the females’ five percent. When asked if they have cheated in more than one class, males reported 57% and females a shocking 68%.

Asked whether or not they would cheat in science class again, 53% o f the males said yes and 37% o f the females said yes. Males also indicated a stronger affinity to cheating again in other classes (81%) than did the females (73%).

Buckley, Wiese & Harvey (1998), administered a 90 item questionnaire to more than 200 students and found males had a higher propensity to engage in unethical academic behavior than did females.

Boys are much more under the impression that cheating can significantly improve an overall grade in a class, 60% versus 51% for girls. Perhaps this is why they are less afi-aid o f getting caught (57%) than are females (70%) and are more

prone to take risks even though they indicated 28% had been caught cheating compared to 20% o f the freshman girls. Ward and Beck (1989), indicated that males are less prone to obey rules o f society and more likely to behave unethically more often than women if the ends appear to justify the means.

Both gender groups agreed (99%) that cheating occurs every day in school.

Eighty four percent of the female respondents think that it is ethically wrong to cheat, and 78% o f the male respondents think that it is ethically wrong. Ward and Beck (1989), previously explained that students are academically dishonest if they believe that no one was hurt by their actions or that a greater good was served by their action.

Complete gender comparison survey results can be found in Appendices K and L.

G.P.A. Comparisons

Grade point averages were self-reported on the survey by each o f the freshman science students. Due to the uneven numbers of respondents in each four major G.P.A groups (grades A through D) that were indicated, grade point averages ranging from 1.0 to 2.5 were considered “low” for purposes o f this thesis study.

Grade point averages ranging from 3.0 to 4.0 were considered “high”.

Results indicated that on quizzes and tests, the lower grade point average student was twice as likely to engage in academic dishonesty. Mixon’s (1996), research results supported these findings. On homework assignments, low grade point average respondents were also more prone to cheating (56%) than were high grade point average respondents (46%). However, when asked in a previous question

whether or not they had cheated in science class this year, low G.P.A. students reported 43% yes and high G.P.A. students reported 53% yes. The reasons for these inconsistencies are not known by the researcher.

Low grade point average students also reported a greater probability o f cheating on their science exam, o f cheating again in both their science class and in other classes, and also at their future places o f employment. Furthermore, a higher percentage o f them indicated cheating in more than one class. Kerkvliet and Sigmund’s (1999), survey o f 500 public university students reported that students with higher grade point averages had a lower probability o f cheating.

One half of the low G.P.A. respondents reported that cheating, if not done too frequently, is okay every once in a while compared to 38% for the high G.P.A. group.

Thirteen percent less respondents o f low grade point average indicated that they thought teachers should be concerned with cheating. Twelve percent more of them also thought that cheating can significantly improve an overall grade in a class.

More than three times as many low grade point average students thought that it was somewhat okay to cheat on a quiz. Furthermore, more than four times as many low G.P.A. students reported that it was somewhat okay to cheat on a test. In Profile o f examination cheaters, (1997), the researchers found not only is grade point average negatively related to cheating, but that G.P.A. is one o f the most important predictors o f academic dishonesty.

Consistency existed between the two grade point average groups regarding the ethical issues o f academic dishonesty. E i^ty-tw o percent o f high G.P.A respondents

and 80% of low G.P.A. respondents indicated that cheating is ethically wrong.

Detailed survey results for grade point average comparisons can be found in Appendices M and N.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this study and statements in Chapter one, cheating is common place in ninth grade science classrooms at Forest Hills Central High School.

The majority o f the surveyed freshman students engage in academic dishonesty and believe it occurs everyday in their school. Cheating occurs in homework assignments, on quizzes and on tests. Even though students perform academically unethical actions less than the previous year, most o f them indicated that they would probably cheat again in both science class and in other classes in school. More than one half o f the students felt that cheating can significantly improve their overall grade in a class and believe that cheating on a homework assignment is more acceptable than on either a quiz or test.

Most o f the ninth grade science students are afraid o f getting caught engaging in academically dishonest acts, but more than three quarters o f them have not been caught.

O f the students that have seen someone cheating in science class this year, almost all of them have not told the teacher.

Despite all o f the previous statements, the majority o f the freshman science students at Forest Hills Central High School believe that cheating is ethically wrong.

Gender appears to be a factor in a student’s propensity to engage in unethical educational practices. Males cheat more in science class, have cheated more in other classes, will more likely cheat again in both science class and other classes in their school, and believe more so that academic dishonesty can significantly improve their overall grade in a class than do females. Males are also less afraid o f getting caught cheating even though more o f them reported having been caught cheating in the past.

Grade point average also appears to be a major factor in a student’s participation in academic dishonesty. Lower grade point average students cheat more on science homework, quizzes and tests and in other classes than higher G.P.A.

students. Higher percentages of low G.P.A. respondents indicated the likelihood of cheating again in both science class and other classes in the future. One half o f low G.P.A. students think that cheating is okay and almost two-thirds o f them feel that it can significantly improve their overall grade in a class.

The objectives and outcomes o f this thesis research project as described in Chapter one have been achieved. Based on the results o f this thesis study, the strategies the researcher used were effective. Likewise, the data is reliable and the results and conclusions o f the survey are valid.

RECOMMENDATIONS / PLANS FOR DISSEMINATION

This section includes a list of suggestions for the use o f the information obtained from this study. It also suggests some additional steps that should be taken as a follow up to this research and also additional research that should be done in

order to properly grasp in a global sense the true influence and impact academic dishonesty has on all students at Forest Hills Central High School. Lastly, plans for the dissemination o f the research results and findings will be discussed. This will include how this work will be shared with colleagues at both Central High School and the other high school in the Forest Hills district, and also with other professionals in academic teaching careers.

The information and data gathered from this research would very easily be used by other high schools o f the neighboring school districts within our region o f the state o f Michigan as well as among high schools in neighboring states which have demographics similar to that o f Forest Hills Central High School. It is comforting to believe that this information will be useful to many school districts aroimd the country and be helpful to educators, administrators and parents as an insight into the potential propensity our nation’s students have o f engaging in unethically dishonest educational practices, particularly at the high school level.

The following is a list o f possible research questions derived from this thesis study that could be used for future investigations. How would the information obtained from the thesis survey results differ among:

- students o f upper class (ie. Sophomores, Juniors and Seniors)?

- male and female students from each upper age group?

- boys and girls o f upper classes from each G.P.A. group?

With a larger sample population, the survey questions would be able to address each o f these situations, leading to a much larger collection o f data and insight into the level and frequency o f cheating among all high school students at Forest Hills Central High School.

It would also be interesting to conduct the same survey with the same group o f students through the next three years o f high school. A comparison o f these results with the results from each previous year could then be made and analyzed. This may lead to some interesting observations and possible changes in the frequencies and perceptions o f cheating among different sex and academic groups as they advance through their high school careers. It would also be interesting to note how and possibly why this particular freshman classes' frequencies o f academic dishonesty in science class changes or remains consistent with previous year's data.

Another point o f consideration for future research pertaining to this topic is something the research either purposefully did not addressed, or chose not to expound upon. These items include why students cheat, the methods and techniques they use, when cheating starts, causes o f temptation, consequences o f cheating, or perceived and actual advantages and disadvantages o f performing academically dishonest acts.

The research also does not show social, economic, religious or ethical factors that can effect cheating. Differences that may exist between these extremely varied groups could lead to some very insightful research and development o f an understanding o f the reasons children engage in academically unethical behavior. Also, this thesis does not address where cheating is learned, at what age it begins, or how long it endures.

Further research could be done to investigate how effective teachers are at deterring cheating and whether or not teachers are actively trying to prevent it from happening in their individual classrooms or their schools. If so, a helpful list o f methods proven to be effective and ineffective in certain situations could be produced. The answers to these intriguing questions could help educators in schools around the nation get a better understanding o f academic dishonesty and the many complex aspects of this intriguing issue. From the results obtained during the course o f this study and personal and casual interviews with fellow colleagues at Forest Hills Central High School, a list o f helpful hints, tips and strategies to minimize a student's opportunity to cheat or consider cheating has been included at the end of this research document (see Appendix O).

A copy o f this thesis will be given to the science department at Forest Hills Central High School. Every teacher within the department, and especially those who teach freshman science students, will be encouraged to read and explore the results of this study. Another copy o f this document will be given to the high school principal and made available to other administrators within the building. It will be strongly encouraged that they share the results o f the survey contained in this thesis with the administrators and teachers o f the second high school in our district. Furthermore, with the construction o f a third high school within our district now underway, this research could prove not only to be extremely helpful, but perhaps invaluable to the development o f curriculum and effective teaching strategies that instill academic honesty within the mindset o f our students and faculty members.

REFERENCES

Abramovitz, M. (2000/ Why cheating is wrong. C u rre n t Health 2, 27(2), 16-19.

Anderman, E.M., Griesinger, T., & Westerfield,G., (1998) Motivation and cheating during early adolescence. Jo u rn al of Educational Psychology, 60 (March

1998), 84-93.

Baird, J. S. (1980). Current trends in college cheating. Psychology in the Schools, 17,515-522.

Bell, A. (1998). Cheating minds. ‘Teen, 42(8), 96.

Broussard, A. & Golson, B. (2000). High school honor cod e curbs cheating. The Education Digest, 65(6), 27-30.

Buckley, M. Ronald, Wiese, Danielle S. Harvey, Michael G. (1998). An investigation into the dimensions o f unethical behavior. J o u rn a l o f E ducation fo r Business, 73(5) May/June 1998, 284-90.

Bushweller, K. (1999). Student cheating: A morality moratorium? The Education Digest. 65(3), 4-11.

Eisen, M. (1972). Characteristic self-esteem, sex, and resistance to temptation.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 68-72.

Evans, Ellis D., and Delores Craig. (1990). Teacher and student perceptions o f academic cheating in middle and senior high schools. J o u rn a l o f Educational R esearch , 84 (September - October 1990), 44-52.

Gomez, D. (2001). Putting the shame back in student cheating. The Education Digest, 67(4), 15-21.

Heilman, M. E., & Martell, R. F. (1986). Exposure to successful women: Antidote to sex discrimination in applicant screening decisions? O rg a n iza tio n a l Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 376-390.

Hetherington, E. M., & Feldman, S. E. (1964). College cheating as a function o f subject and situational variables. Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 212-218.

Johnson, C. D., & Gormly, J. (1972). Academic cheating: The contribution o f sex.

personality, and situational variables. Developmental Psychology, 6, 320- 325.

Kanfer, F. H., & Duerfeldt, P. H. (1968). Age, class standing and commitment as determinants o f cheating in children. Child Development, 39, 545-557.

Kelly, J. A., & Worrell, L. (1978). Personality characteristics, parent behaviors, and sex o f subject in relation to cheating. Journal of Research in Personality, 12, 179-188.

Kerkvliet, J. & Sigmund, C. (1999). Can we control cheating in the classroom?

Journal of Economic Education, 30(4), 331.

Kleiner, C. & Lord, M. (1999, November 22). The cheating game. U.S. News &

World Report, 127(20), 54-7.

Leming, J. s. (1980). Cheating behavior, subject variables, and components o f the internal-external scale under high and low risk conditions. Journal of Educational Research, 74, 83-87.

Maass, A., & Volpato, C. (1989). Gender differences in self-serving attributions about sexual experiences. Journal o f Applied Social Psychology, 19, 517- 542.

Me Cabe, Donald Lee (1999). Academic dishonesty among high school students.

Adolescence, 34 (winter 1999), 681-7.

McLaughlin, Rose D., and Steven M. Ross. (1989) Student cheating in high school:

a case o f moral reasoning versus ‘Juzzy logic '. High School Journal, 72 (Feb-March 1989), 97-104.

Mixon, Franklin G., Jr. (1996). Crime in the classroom: An extension. The Journal of Economic Education, 27 (Summer 1996), 195-200.

Murdock, T. (1999). Discouraging cheating in your classroom. The Mathematics Teacher, 92(7), 587-591.

Murdock, Tamera B., Natalie Hale, and Mary Jo Weber. (1998) Predictors o f cheating among early adolescents: Academic and social motivations.

Unpublished manuscript.

Mussen, P., Rutherford, E., Harris, S., & Keasey, C. B. (1970). Honesty and altruism among preadolescents. Developmental Psychology, 3, 169-194.

Powell, G. N., (1990). One more time: Do female and male managers differ?

Powell, G. N., (1990). One more time: Do female and male managers differ?