CHEATING HABIT ITS EFFECT TO THE STUDENTS

OF SUMOROY AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL

ACEDERA, JOSHUA
BELLO, KIM
CERBITO, JERICHO
PINCA, JUMA
POTOT, RIC

DR. GEMMA S. CALOT

TEACHER

2018
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The purpose of this paper is to present and interpret

the effect of cheating habits to the students of Sumoroy

Agro Industrial School.

It is important to know the effect to the students on

cheating because most of the students cheat. This serves as

an evaluation of their deed. The first thing to recognize

about cheating is that vast majority of students believe

that cheating is bad, yet, there are still many who

practice it. Cheating in school is called academic

dishonesty. There are types of academic dishonesty

according to D. Stuber- McEwen (2009). This includes

fabrication, plagiarism, multiple submissions, and abuse of

academic materials, deception and misrepresentation,

electronic dishonesty and carelessness. According to

American Counselling Association (2005), among current

college students, 75% admit to cheating on tests, quizzes,

and homework. Students cheat because of a grade-focused

environment (Anderman, 1998). This occurs when students

give more emphasis on earning good grades instead of

learning. When students cheat, their sense of determination

between right and wrong changes, in other words, the more

one cheats, the easier it becomes to rationalize one’s

behavior and cheat again which Shu, Gino,and Bazerman

(2011) were pointing out. Cheating has been on the rise in

recent years, according to a 2010 study from Josephson

Institute of Ethics.1

Today’s college students are growing up in a society

where ethical values are declining and scandals involving

dishonesty in government, business and other organizations

are frequent occurrences. Many research and media reports

have addressed the pervasiveness of academic dishonesty. In

1964, Bill Bowers surveyed more than 5,000 college students

and found that 75 percent reported engaging in one or more

incidents of academic dishonesty. His study was repeated in

1994 by McCabe and Trevino(1997) and only a modest increase

in academic dishonesty was reported. The study, however,

did report a significant increase in cheating on exams and

cheating by women. In a 2002 report for CNN, Kathy Slobogin

reported on a national survey of 4,500 high school students

conducted by Rutgers’ Management Research Education Center.

The report revealed that 75 percent of the students

1
Grace Andoyo, slideshare.net/gandoyo/eng5-cheatingfinal-research p5-7
admitted being engaged in serious cheating (Slobogin 2002).

Similar research conducted by Don McCabe for The Center for

Academic Integrity at Duke University revealed that 70

percent of the 50,000 undergraduate students surveyed

during 2002 to 2005, on some 60 campuses nationwide,

reported cheating (McCabe 2005).2

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed at determining the effect of cheating

habits of the students of Sumoroy Agro Industrial School.

Specifically, this study will try to answer the

following questions:

1. What is the students profile as to:

1.1 age

1.2 sex

1.3 Educational Attainment

2. What kind of cheating habit and how they cheat?

3. What are the effective ways to avoid cheating?

4. Is there a significant difference between students on

cheating to students not cheating?

2
Blankenship, K. and Whitley, B. 2000. Relation of general deviance to academic dishonesty. Ethic &
Behavior 10(1): 1-12.
Objective of the Study

The purpose of this study is to determine the cheating

habit and its effect to the students of Sumoroy Agro-

Industrial School.

Specifically the study aimed to determine the following:

1. Profile of the students in terms of:

1.1 age

1.2 sex

1.3 Educational Attainment

2. To know the kind of cheating habit and how they cheat.

3. To determine the effective ways to avoid cheating.

4. Determine the significant difference between students

on cheating to students not cheating.

Importance of the study

This study is significant to investigate the effect of

cheating habits to the students of Sumoroy Agro Industrial

School

In this context, the study is important for the

following reasons:
 Students. This will give them concrete information

with regards to their cheating habit and its effect to

their studies.

Future Researchers. Accurate and comprehensive

information is a vital guide for most researchers in

various field of study. It will help broaden the

researcher’s knowledge to conduct studies aided by the

findings of this study.

This study will provide to the students of Sumoroy

Agro Industrial School (SAIS) with the important

information, which would be the basis in cheating habit and

its effect to their studies.

Significance of the Study

The purpose of this study was to know the cheating

habit and its effect to the students of Sumoroy Agro

Industrial School. Using a qualitative research design.

Furthermore, we aimed to collect ideas and recommendations

in order to facilitate the development of effective and

tailored intervention programs aiming to improve the

quality of the study in SAIS.

Scope Delimitation

This study focused on determining the cheating habit

of the students of Sumoroy Agro –Industrial School,

Palapag, Northern Samar and the effect to the kind of

studying they practice.

Specifically this study is delimited to the

determination of the respondents’ profile in terms of their

age, sex and educational attainment. This study will also

determine what are the kind of cheating habit and how they

cheat; the effective ways to avoid cheating in during their

quizzes and examinations.; and the significant difference

between students on cheating to students not cheating on

their examinations and quizzes.

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on the study conducted at

Austin State University , this study’s findings are similar

to those of other studies focusing on the relationship

between cheating and unethical behavior in the workplace.

Students who cheat on tests and/or homework in high school

and/or college are more likely to engage in property- and

production-deviant activities than their counterparts who

do not cheat. However, this study indicates that high

school cheating habits are a better indicator of a person’s

deviant behavior in the workplace. Educators at all levels

must take the responsibility for changing the mindset of

students from believing that cheating is acceptable to

believing that it will not be tolerated. Research indicates

that the best alternative is for educational institutions

to implement and strictly enforce an honor code. Even

modified honor codes prove to be a successful deterrent.

Compared to the Hollinger and Clark survey of retail

employees today’s students are as much as 13 times more

likely to engage in certain deviant behavior. Perhaps

employers should consider pre-employment screening which

includes a test of applicants’ academic cheating habits. If

employers can avoid hiring individuals with a history of

academic cheating, they can reduce the cost associated with

deviant employee behavior. Employers should also take an

active interest in curbing academic dishonesty (cheating)

by working with students, faculty members and

administrators to encourage ethical student behavior.3

This study is anchored on the theory of Becker 1968

According to him, when people are able to commit unethical

deeds, they consider the benefits it may bring, the

3
Sharon M. Graves, Stephen F. Austin State University, Students Cheating Habits Volume 3 p21
possibility of being caught and the magnitude of possible

punishment. Note that all of these are external factors.

This model is intuitively valid and people seem to think

that way. We are more likely to cheat when we can benefit

more from it, we are more likely to cheat when no one

watches us and mild punishments may tempt us to take a

risk, as opposed to harsher ones. This is a powerful idea

and people like to think that they always conduct

sophisticated reasoning, reaching the most rational

conclusion in the end.4

Moreover the study conducted by Donald L. McCabe, a

professor at the Rutgers University Business School, and a

leading researcher on cheatin, there have always been

struggling students who cheat to survive. But more and

more, there are students at the top who cheat to thrive.

A recent study by Jeffrey A. Roberts and David M.

Wasieleski at Duquesne University found that the more

online tools college students were allowed to use to

complete an assignment, the more likely they were to copy

the work of others.

4
Piotr M. Patrzyk, Cheating Behavior, Human Nature & Decision Making Vol 6 No.03 P. 1-5
 The Internet has changed attitudes, as a world of

instant downloading, searching, cutting and pasting has

loosened some ideas of ownership and authorship. An

increased emphasis on having students work in teams may

also have played a role. Students are surprisingly unclear

about what constitutes plagiarism or cheating (Mr.

Wasieleski, an associate professor of management).

Howard Gardner, a professor at the Harvard Graduate

School of Education, study that over the 20 years he has

studied professional and academic integrity the ethical

muscles have atrophied, in part because of a culture that

exalts success, however it is attained. The attitude he has

found among students at elite colleges is: We want to be

famous and successful, we think our colleagues are cutting

corners, we’ll be damned if we’ll lose out to them, and

some day, when we’ve made it, we’ll be role models. But

until then, give us a pass.

Numerous projects and research studies have shown that

frequently reinforcing standards, to both students and

teachers, can lessen cheating. But experts say most schools

fail to do so.5

In connection with the above idea, cheating habit is

not a good practice of the students.

Conceptual Framework

Educational institutions such as schools and

universities aim to develop the academic potential,

knowledge, skills, and abilities among its students and

instill in them values and conduct that will mold their

character and must be upheld. However, for many years, the

unceasing issue of cheating and other forms of academic

dishonesty linked to the increasing population of students

engaging in academic misconduct. Despite of knowing that

cheating is an unethical behavior, still, more and more

students involve themselves on it and had enumerated a list

of reasons why they had done it so. In this study, the

perception of the students (as the independent variable)

affects their reason/s why they cheat (reasons as the

5
RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA, www.nytimes.com/2012/09/08/education/studies-show-more-students-cheat-
even-high-achievers.html
dependent variable). If the student perceives cheating as

unethical and a bad doing, then he/she has less/no reason

at all to cheat. Otherwise, if he/she sees cheating as a

good thing to do then, he/she has a lot of reasons to count

why the act has been done. However, there are intervening

variables to be considered such as social or external

factors and demographic characteristics of the student

which can influence them as to how they perceive cheating

differently.

Paradigm

The fundamental conceptualization of this study is

presented in the schematic illustration as follows:

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Students as a
Respondent according
to their: Effect to
the students
 Age
 Sex
 Educational
Attainment

Kind of cheating
habit
Definition of Terms

Cheating is the receiving of a reward for ability or

finding an easy way out of an unpleasant situation by

dishonest means. It is generally used for the breaking of

rules to gain unfair advantage in a competitive situation.

Habit a settled or regular tendency or practice, especially

one that is hard to give up.

Practice the actual application or use of an idea, belief,

or method as opposed to theories about such application or

use.

Dishonesty is to act without honesty. It is used to

describe a lack of probity, cheating, lying, or being

deliberately deceptive or a lack in integrity, knavishness,

perfidiosity, corruption or treacherousness.

Academic dishonesty is defined as a student's use of

unauthorized assistance with intent to deceive an

instructor or other such person who may be assigned to

evaluate the student's work in meeting course and degree

requirement
 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDY

This study presents a review of literature and studies

relevant to the present study.

Related Literature and study

The literature review of this study, addressing

academic dishonesty, includes varied scopes to be discussed

in order to understand more the problem regarding cheating

habit. In this chapter, varied definitions of cheating and

other forms of academic dishonesty were discussed from

different authors. Reasons and ways are enumerated to

assess the perception of students and what other factors

could have been influenced the learners to cheat.

Educational institutions offer and provide high quality

education for their students aiming to produce well-

competitive and effective bona fide graduates. Tests and

examinations were given to evaluate the learning knowledge

and acquired skills of the learners. The evaluation became

the standard basis of the teachers and faculties in

identifying whether the students must pass the subject or

the course taken. Cheating diminishes the value and

validity of the results of the assessment of tainted data

(Athanasou & Olasehinde, 2002). Acing the examinations or

at least passing the test became the priority of most

students rather than learning the context of the subject

matter itself. Students who take forbidden shortcuts with

their homework will just end up cheating themselves since

they don’t derive any intellectual benefits from doing the

assignment (Khon 2006). Students who are desperate to pass

the evaluation test without stressing out too much of them

resolve to the most confiding yet imperilling act of

cheating. Cheating has been an inevitable and a common

undying impediment among schools and universities. McCabe

(1992) surveyed a sample of 6,097 students and found out

that 67 percent of the target sample admitted cheating.

Cheating, as a form of academic dishonesty, had become a

widespread culture among students in either private or

public institutions. Among college students, percentage of

cheating ranges from 9 percent (Davis et al., 1992) to 95

percent (McCabe & Trevino, 2002). Symaco and Marcelo (2003)

pointed out that academic dishonesty is an unceasing

problem despite of the efforts the institution put to get

rid of it. Weaver, Davis, Look, Buzzanga, and Neal (1991,

p. 302) defined academic dishonesty as “a violation of an

institution’s policy on honesty”. William L. Kibler defined

academic dishonesty as “forms of cheating and plagiarism

that involve students giving or receiving unauthorized

assistance in an academic exercise or receiving credit for

work that is not their own.” Burke (1999) said that

cheating is “intentionally using or attempting to use

unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any

academic exercise”, and plagiarism is “intentionally or

knowingly representing the word of another as one’s own in

any academic exercise”. Earl Babbie noted that “presenting

someone else’s words or ideas as your own – in any form –

constitutes plagiarism”. Cizek (2003) states that cheating

behavior falls under three categories: (1) “giving, taking

or receiving information”, (2) using any prohibited

materials” and, (3) “capitalizing on the weaknesses of

persons, procedures or processes to gain an advantage”. In

1993, in a study conducted by Who’s Who Among High School

Students among high achievers found out that “nearly 80%

admitted to some form of dishonesty, such as copying

someone else’s homework or cheating on an exam”. According

to Murdock and Stephens (2007), one who copies tend to

consider their behavior acceptable is when they see others

copy and cheat regularly and does not take the action

seriously. Von Dran, Callahan, & Taylor (2001) wrote that

academic dishonesty “is defined in the literature as

intentionally unethical behavior.” Regardless of the fact

that it is unethical, more and more students still engage

themselves in cheating. Though students know that cheating

is against the rules, they realized that cheating is

acceptable and can be “peer pressure” to copy (McCabe et

al., 1999). Also, one of the aspects of neutralizing

cheating behavior is that “everyone copies” (Pulvers &

Diekhoff, 1999). Variety of reason why students engage in

cheating is because of competitiveness of their major,

course difficulty, the need for professional success,

cynicism and that other students cheat (Chop & Silva, 1991;

Davis, 1992; Fass, 1986; Mixon, 1996; Simpson, 1989).

According to Russell, Roberts and Radziejowska (2011) on

their journal Dishonesty in the MRCP (UK) Part 1 and Part 2

Written Examinations, stress and pressure for good grades

are the given reason for cheating and cheating is seldom

detected and when it is, action is rarely taken. In

connection to desiring good grades (McCabe & Trevino, 1997;

Singhal, 1982), the need to keep a scholarship (Diekhoff et

al., 1996) is another reason for cheating. The reasons

student justify in cheating are: poverty, lack of time,

careless instructors, laziness, peer pressure, poor role

model, and fear of failure (Robert, 2002). Also, heavy

workloads, and teacher-centered reasons – such as poor

instruction, confusing lectures, etc. (Baird, 1980;

Generaux, 1995) – ignorance, uncertainty or confusion

regarding what the behavior comprises (Davis et al., 1992)

can be added on the list.

Demographic characteristics of students who cheat and do

not are also to be in great consideration (Haines et al.,

1986; Stevens & Stevens, 1987). Gender influences

perception of students in academic dishonesty for men

generally reported having higher percentage of cheating

than women (Aiken, 1991; McCabe et al., 2002). Women cheat

when it is an opportunity to help another student whereas,

men is for personal advantage (Calabrese & Cochran, 1989).

Age is another factor to be considered. Cheating declines

with age (Sheard et al., 2003). Younger students cheat more

frequently than older students (Antion & Michael, 1983),

though not at all times (Hilbert, 1985; Tang & Zuo, 1997)

for seniors cheat more often than freshmen (Mofatt, 1990),

younger students are more immature both in personality and

age (Haines et al., 1986). Middle high school classrooms

are more likely to engage in cheating than elementary

school classrooms because they are more focused on grades

and ability than in case in elementary school (Anderman and

Turner 2004). Also, students who cheat earlier are likely

to continue this behavior until college (Davis & Ludvigson,

1995). Grade point average (GPA) is also linked to academic

dishonesty. Students with lower GPAs are more likely to

cheat than those who have higher (Bunn, Caudill, & Gropper,

1992), it is because they have “less to lose and more to

gain” (Leming, 1980). Another factor linked in academic

dishonesty is the involvement in extracurricular

activities. Varsity players have higher risk in academic

cheating compared to students who are not (Diekhoff et al.,

1996; Haines et al., 1986) and those who are involved in

fraternities or sororities (Baird, 1980; Diekhoff et al.,

1996; Haines et al., 1986). Students involved in

extracurricular activities have lesser time to allocate for

their academics and in studying (McCabe & Trevino, 1997)

and there may be social pressures from the group (Baird,

1980, Diekhoff et al., 1996; Haines et al., 1986).

Dishonesty is learned from peers and cheating creates an

atmosphere where honesty is a drawback (Dichtl, 2003).

Also, situational factor in the school or classroom

environment ease academic dishonesty among students (Symaco

& Marcelo, 2003). Students tend to cheat due to competitive

educational setting (Anderman and Midgley 2004). Students

who are motivated to learn are less able to copy than those

performance-based learners (Jordan, 2001; Newstead et al.,

1996). Cole and Kiss (2000) remarked, “Students are more

likely to use academic dishonesty practices when they think

their assignments are meaningless and they are less likely

to cheat when they admire and respect their teachers and

are excited about what they are learning.” Zimmerman (2009)

concluded that cheating prevalence was significantly

correlated with the institutions’ inconsistent responses to

student cheating and lack of diligence among instructors at

catching cheaters. A study on the teacher fairness showed

that 25% of the students are more likely to cheat if the

teacher is being unfair (Graham et al., 1994). Other

situational factors include: unproctored tests, penalty

systems, and teaching styles (Kibler, 1993). The use of

sanction and punishment could lessen the occurrence of

cheating (Haines et al., 1986; Davis et al., 1992). “Group

mentality” of cheating or students who live together in

dormitories are more likely to engage in cheating (Dawkins,

2004). And student from larger institutions have greater

percentage to cheat compared to those in small private

institutions (Brown & Emett, 2001). The rate of cheating

falls as the quantity and quality of study time rises up

(Norton et al., 2001). Students who procrastinate more are

most to be involved in cheating than those students who

plan and study ahead of time (Roig & DeTommaso, 1995).

Students have developed new techniques of cheating (Johnson

& Martin, 2005) though old techniques were still used in

time. Academic dishonesty includes, lying, cheating on

exams, copying of test responses from a classmate, taking

exams for other people, altering or forging documents,

buying papers, plagiarism, altering research results and

making up sources and failure to cite other people’s work,

breaking into the office to access test or answer key and a

lot more (Arent, 1991; Moore, 1988; Paacker, 1990; Pratt &

McLaughlin, 1989; Petress, 2003). Four areas of academic

dishonesty: 1) cheating with the use of unauthorized

materials, 2) fabrication or making up of information,

references or results, 3) plagiarism, and 4) engaging other

students in academic dishonesty (Pavela, 1978). In today’s

generation, technology became a port for student to find

new tool for cheating. Students use cellphones to

communicate with others outside the exam room to obtain

answers and get information and searching on the web during

examinations became a dispute on the educators of new

generation (Johnson and Martin, 2005). On the research

conducted by Donald L. McCabe (2003), internet plagiarism

ascends. According to Lehman and DuFrene (2011), “The

Internet has made plagiarism more common due to the ease of

copying and pasting the work of others and claiming it as

one’s own” (p.328). Copying text from the Internet is so

easy (Howard & Davies, 2009) and access to information is

one click away (Miniwatts Marketing Group, 2011). This

cheating method became viral (Netter, 2010). In Bouville’s

(2010) publication, “Why is Cheating Wrong?” he stated

reasons on why cheaters must not practice academic

dishonesty. Grades determine the competency, knowledge and

skills of a student. Also, it predicts on whether a student

will be successful or not in the future. As Passow et al

(2006) noted that “acts of academic dishonesty undermine

the validity of the measure of learning”. Academic

dishonesty jeopardizes the name of the student and

especially of the school as well as its credibility to

uphold integrity and ethical values among its students and

produce well-grounded graduates. School administrators and

teachers must emboss character formation to students and be

liable for their misconduct (Storm & Storm, 2007). At the

end, it is all up to the administrators and faculty of the

institutions on how they dealt with intolerance and penalty

among students who indulge in cheating.6

6
Grace Andoyo, slideshare.net/gandoyo/eng5-cheatingfinal-research p12-13
Similarities and Differences

This literature is closely related to the current

study for it directly mentions the cheating habits and

academic dishonesty, includes varied scopes to be discussed

in order to understand more the problem regarding cheating

habit.

The present study like the article reviewed aims to

establish a cheating habit and academic dishonesty and the

effect to the students.

This is also similar to the present study because it

both discussed about the cheating habits of the student in

taking their exams and doing their assignments to get

higher grades.
 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Locale of the Study

This study will be conducted in Sumoroy Agro

Industrial School. It is found at Barangay Tinampo,

Palapag, Northern Samar.

Research Design
 The respondents of this study are 100 Students of

Sumoroy Agro Industrial School, School Year 2017-2018. They

will be distributed with research questionnaires on Sumoroy

Agro-Industrial School.

The Variables

This study dealt with cheating habits and the profiles

of the respondents are independent variables, and the

effect to the respondents as dependent variable.

Research Design

This study employed the case study of research problem or

procedure involving the control or manipulating or

condition for the purpose of studying the relative effect.

Research Method

The descriptive survey method of research,

involving the use of a questionnaire and documentary

analysis will be utilized in conducting this study. The

descriptive method of research will be a great emphasis and

used in order to come up with a substantial, accurate, and

fully accessible data for the study.

Research Instrument
 The data gathering instrument that will be used in

this study in survey a questionnaire. Equipped with the

knowledge gained from the readings, the researchers

constructed the questionnaire. It will be submitted to

their adviser for improvement. After its revision or

improvement, some copies were produced and issued to the

target respondents. Before the distribution of the

questionnaire, a letter of request permitting the

researchers to conduct the study will be served.

After a week, the copies of the questionnaires will

be gathered. The responses who answered the specific

questions will be tabulated and presented in distribution

tables. They were analyzed and interpreted using certain

suitable answer.

Population Sampling

This study include the 100 students of Sumoroy Agro-

Industrial School.

Source of data

The sources of data were:

The demographic data of the respondents are the

students of Sumoroy Agro-Industrial School.

Procedures of testing data:

Collected data will be presented on tables. All these

data will be based on the feedback from the questionnaires,

frequency distribution and percentage will be done in all

variables using the following formulas:

1. Percentage

P=nx100

P= Percentage

n= Small portion
Scoring and Interpretation

The respondents will answer 10 questions, indicated

the agreement or disagreement to the listed attitudes using

the following response mode:

Verbal
Rating Scales
Interpretation
4 Always (A)

3 Sometimes (S)

2 Rarely (R)

1 Never (N)

Validation and Research

The research teacher and SHS Coordinator Teacher of Sumoroy

Agro Industrial School will validate the questionnaire.

Their corrections and suggestions will be in cooperated in

the draft for the next stage on validation. The 50 students

only who will be asked to answer the questionnaire. Their

responses will be tested for reliability.