Knowledge Bias: Perceptions of Copying among Lecturers and Students of Education Case Study of a Teaching College

1
Yoav Gal
Yoav Gal
2
Adiv Gal
Adiv Gal
1 Kibbutzim College of Education Technology and the Arts

Send Message

To: Author

GJHSS Volume 15 Issue G4

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

TR058

Knowledge Bias: Perceptions of Copying among Lecturers and Students of Education Case Study of a Teaching College Banner
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu

Everywhere in the world, the academically immoral and unethical behavior of copying in academic institutions no longer shocks anyone. In this study, the authors argue that this phenomenon is prevalent even within academic institutions of education intended for the training of teachers. That is, students who soon would be responsible for the ethical code of their students. This phenomenon of copying is based on three main factors: Students, the academic institution, and the teaching staff. The students’ perception of copying was examined through questionnaires and it can be stated that the phenomenon is considered significantly normative. The lecturers’ perception was examined through indepth interviews and it is emphasized that they are indeed aware of the phenomenon being widespread. Nevertheless, they also think that the institution sets double standards regarding it. On the one hand, the academic institution declares its intent to stamp out the copying phenomenon, while simultaneously encouraging it by being overly tolerant and by not addressing the issue when it does arise in disciplinary committees. Therefore, a self-reinforcing cycle emerges with the students seeing the phenomenon as significantly normative, the academic institution setting double standards, and the lecturing staff finding itself stuck between a rock and a hard place when dealing with the problem.

47 Cites in Articles

References

  1. Aacsb (2009). Eligibility procedures and accreditation standards for business accreditation (The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business.
  2. M Abdolmohammadi,C Baker (2008). Moral reasoning and questionable behavior.
  3. E Anderman,T Griesinger,G Westerfield (1998). Motivation and cheating during early adolescence.
  4. K Blankenship,B Whitley (2000). Relation of general deviance to academic dishonesty.
  5. P Boehm,M Justice,S Weeks (2009). Promoting academic integrity in higher education.
  6. W Bowers (1964). Arey, charles K. sciencc expeiiences for Eexperiencess for Elementary Schools. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1962. 110 P. $1.50.
  7. Beverly Browne,Dennis Kaldenberg,William Browne,Daniel Brown (1998). Student as Customer: Factors Affecting Satisfaction and Assessments of Institutional Quality.
  8. P Craig,E Federici,M Buehler (2010). Instructing Students in Academic Integrity.
  9. M Conlin (2007). Cheating -or postmodern learning.
  10. Jacqueline Douglas,Alex Douglas,Barry Barnes (2006). Measuring student satisfaction at a UK university.
  11. Stephanie Etter,Jackie Cramer,Seth Finn (2006). Origins of Academic Dishonesty.
  12. Bruno Frey (2010). Withering Academia?.
  13. Yoav Gal,Adiv Gal (2014). Knowledge Bias: Is There a Link Between Students’ Feedback and the Grades They Expect to Get from the Lecturers They Have Evaluated? A Case Study of Israeli Colleges.
  14. A Gibson (2010). Measuring business student satisfaction: a review and summary of the major predictors.
  15. M Graham,J Monday,K O'brien,S Steffen (1994). Cheating at small colleges: an examination of student and faculty attitudes and behaviors.
  16. C Gulli,N Kohler,M Patriquin (2007). Case 16: Charley Pell and University of Florida Cheating.
  17. S Johnson,M Martin (2005). Academic dishonesty: a new twist to an old problem.
  18. A Kasher (2012). Academic Ethics: sad memories, teaching in the Academy -a journal on teaching in higher education institutions.
  19. H Klien,N Levenburg,M Mckendall,W Mothersell (2007). Cheating during the college years: how do business students compare?.
  20. R Lawson (2004). Is classroom cheating related to business students' propensity to cheat in the ''real world?.
  21. L Jensen,J Arnett,S Feldman,E Cauffman (2002). It's wrong, but everybody does it: academic dishonesty among high school and college students.
  22. Gwena Lovett-Hooper,Meera Komarraju,Rebecca Weston,Stephen Dollinger (2007). Is Plagiarism a Forerunner of Other Deviance? Imagined Futures of Academically Dishonest Students.
  23. Hongyan Ma,Guofang Wan,Eric Lu (2008). Digital Cheating and Plagiarism in Schools.
  24. Helen Marsden,Marie Carroll,James Neill (2005). Who cheats at university? A self-report study of dishonest academic behaviours in a sample of Australian university students.
  25. D Mccabe,W Bowers (1994). Academic dishonesty among males in college: a thirty year perspective.
  26. Donald Mccabe,Kenneth Butterfield,Linda Treviño (2006). Academic Dishonesty in Graduate Business Programs: Prevalence, Causes, and Proposed Action.
  27. Ana Moro-Egido,Judith Panades (2010). An Analysis of Student Satisfaction: Full-Time vs. Part-Time Students.
  28. Tamera Murdock,Eric Anderman (2006). Motivational Perspectives on Student Cheating: Toward an Integrated Model of Academic Dishonesty.
  29. S Newstead,A Franklyn-Stokes,P Armstead (1996). Individual Differences in Student Cheating.
  30. S Nonis,C Swift (2001). An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty and workplace dishonesty: a multicampus investigation.
  31. Suzanne Ogilby (1995). The Ethics of Academic Behavior: Will It Affect Professional Behavior?.
  32. D Owunwanne,N Rustagi,R Dada (2010). Students' perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in higher institutions.
  33. Ashvin Parameswaran (2007). Student dishonesty and faculty responsibility.
  34. Y Peled,S Khalidi (2011). The phenomenon of copies and forgeries of Arabic-speaking students at colleges in the North of Israel.
  35. Peggy Piascik,Gayle Brazeau (2010). Promoting a Culture of Academic Integrity.
  36. David Rettinger,Yair Kramer (2008). Situational and Personal Causes of Student Cheating.
  37. C Rokovski,E Levy (2007). Academic dishonesty: perceptions of business students.
  38. L Schmelkin,K Gilbert,K Spencer,H Pincus,R Silva (2008). A multidimensional scaling of college students' perceptions of academic dishonesty.
  39. L Shu,F Gino,M Bazerman (2011). Dishonest deed, clear conscience: When cheating leads to moral disengagement and motivated forgetting.
  40. Mark Simkin,Alexander Mcleod (2010). Why Do College Students Cheat?.
  41. Randi Sims (1993). The Relationship Between Academic Dishonesty and Unethical Business Practices.
  42. M Tessema,K Ready,W Yu (2012). Factors affecting college students' satisfaction with major curriculum: evidence from nine years of data.
  43. N Thompson (2000). APA survey finds many U.S. workers feel stressed out and undervalued.
  44. Tim West,Sue Ravenscroft,Charles Shrader (2004). Cheating and Moral Judgment in the College Classroom: A Natural Experiment.
  45. B Whitley,P Keith-Spiegel (2002). Academic integrity as an institutional issue.
  46. Kevin Williams,Craig Nathanson,Delroy Paulhus (2010). Identifying and profiling scholastic cheaters: Their personality, cognitive ability, and motivation..
  47. Yardley Rodrı´guez,M Bates,S Nelson,J (2009). True confessions? alumni's retrospective reports on undergraduate cheating behaviors.

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

Yoav Gal. 2015. \u201cKnowledge Bias: Perceptions of Copying among Lecturers and Students of Education Case Study of a Teaching College\u201d. Global Journal of Human-Social Science - G: Linguistics & Education GJHSS-G Volume 15 (GJHSS Volume 15 Issue G4): .

Download Citation

Issue Cover
GJHSS Volume 15 Issue G4
Pg. 11- 24
Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJHSS

Print ISSN 0975-587X

e-ISSN 2249-460X

Keywords
Classification
GJHSS-G Classification: FOR Code: 130313p
Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

April 23, 2015

Language

English

Experiance in AR

The methods for personal identification and authentication are no exception.

Read in 3D

The methods for personal identification and authentication are no exception.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 4337
Total Downloads: 2180
2026 Trends
Research Identity (RIN)
Related Research

Published Article

Everywhere in the world, the academically immoral and unethical behavior of copying in academic institutions no longer shocks anyone. In this study, the authors argue that this phenomenon is prevalent even within academic institutions of education intended for the training of teachers. That is, students who soon would be responsible for the ethical code of their students. This phenomenon of copying is based on three main factors: Students, the academic institution, and the teaching staff. The students’ perception of copying was examined through questionnaires and it can be stated that the phenomenon is considered significantly normative. The lecturers’ perception was examined through indepth interviews and it is emphasized that they are indeed aware of the phenomenon being widespread. Nevertheless, they also think that the institution sets double standards regarding it. On the one hand, the academic institution declares its intent to stamp out the copying phenomenon, while simultaneously encouraging it by being overly tolerant and by not addressing the issue when it does arise in disciplinary committees. Therefore, a self-reinforcing cycle emerges with the students seeing the phenomenon as significantly normative, the academic institution setting double standards, and the lecturing staff finding itself stuck between a rock and a hard place when dealing with the problem.

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]
×

This Page is Under Development

We are currently updating this article page for a better experience.

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

Quote and Order Details

Contact Person

Invoice Address

Notes or Comments

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Knowledge Bias: Perceptions of Copying among Lecturers and Students of Education Case Study of a Teaching College

Yoav Gal
Yoav Gal Kibbutzim College of Education Technology and the Arts
Adiv Gal
Adiv Gal

Research Journals