Why Students Cheat: An Exploration of the Motivators of Student Academic Dishonesty in Higher Education
It is difficult to remember any recent conversation about assessment or learning standards in higher education where academic dishonesty was not mentioned. Tension in relation to student behaviors in this regard appears to be growing as the perfect storm of commercialization, massification, disengagement, resource constraints, short termism, and increased (and ease of) opportunity converge to influence student (and faculty) behavior and attitudes. Add this to the rapidly evolving higher education landscape with a workforce that is often not trained in education, is increasingly casualized, and often deprioritizes teaching and learning relative to other academic pursuits, and the opportunity for academic dishonesty is obvious.
Within this context, this chapter examines the motivations of student academic dishonesty in higher education. Drawing on the empirical literature, seven groups of motivators are identified that illustrate a range of contextual, situational, and awareness/knowledge-based motivators.
It is concluded that while a range of factors motivate student behavior, the higher education landscape and academic culture are also key components. There are a range of strategies that may mitigate these activities (such as academic professional development, improved assessment design, student training, and technological advancements). It is argued that a dedicated medium-term approach is required to combat the rising tide and the changing higher education landscape.
- Black, E. W., Greaser, J. J., & Dawson, K. (2014). Academic dishonesty in traditional and online classrooms: Does the “media equation” hold true? Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3–4), 23–30.Google Scholar
- Brimble, M. A., & Stevenson-Clarke, P. (2006). Managing academic dishonesty in Australian universities: Implications for teaching, learning and scholarship. Accounting, Accountability and Performance, 12(1), 32–63.Google Scholar
- David, F., Anderson, L., & Lawrimore, K. (1990). Perspectives on business ethics in management education. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 9, 26–32.Google Scholar
- Gerdeman, R. (2000). Academic dishonesty and the community college. Los Angels: ERIC Digest, ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges.Google Scholar
- Graves, S. M., & Austin, S. F. (2008). Student cheating habits: A predictor of workplace deviance. Journal of Diversity Management, 3(1), 15–22.Google Scholar
- Kremmer, M. L., Brimble, M. A., & Stevenson-Clarke, P. (2007). Investigating the probability of student cheating: The relevance of student characteristics, assessment items, perceptions of prevalence and history of engagement. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 3(2), 3–17.Google Scholar
- Marshall, S., & Garry, M. (2006). NESB and ESB students’ attitudes and perceptions of plagiarism. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 2(1), 26–37.Google Scholar
- Molnar, K., Kletke, M., & Jenkel, I. (2009). Does the type of institution influence undergraduate students ethical opinions? Decision Sciences Institute, 2009, Proceedings, New Orleans.Google Scholar
- Owunwanne, D., Rustagi, N., & Dada, R. (2010). Students’ perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in higher institutions. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(11), 59–68.Google Scholar
- Simon, C., Carr, J., McCullough, S., Morgan, S., Oleson, T., & Ressel, M. (2004). Gender, student perceptions, intuitional commitments and academic dishonesty: Who reports in academic dishonesty cases? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, 72–90.Google Scholar
- Stevenson-Clarke, P., & Brimble, M. A. (2007). “Academic dishonesty in accounting students: Implications for educators, the accounting profession and the business community”. Chapter 21 in P. Gupta, R. K. Jain & J. Dhan (Eds.). Enterprise Competitiveness (pp. 228–244). New Delhi: Allied Publishers.Google Scholar
- Woessner, M. C. (2004). Beating the house: How inadequate penalties for cheating make plagiarism an excellent gamble. Political Science and Politics, April, pp. 313–320.Google Scholar
- Young, J. R. (2010). High-tech cheating abounds and professors bear some blame. The Chronicle of Higher Education, March 28.Google Scholar