Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.
Chapter
Chapter
ley, 1999). The impetus for understanding the underlying dynamics of dishonest behavior among students stems from the conviction that, apart from assuming the role of an educational and credentialing agency, the primary focus of an academic institution is to provide an environment for personal development of our youth in the moral, cognitive, physical, social, and aesthetic spheres. An atmosphere that promotes academic honesty and integrity is a precondition for generating, evaluat-ing, and discussing ideas in the pursuit of truth, which are at the very heart of aca-demic life. Research has shown that dishonesty in college, cheating in particular, is a predic-tor of unethical behavior in subsequent professional settings (e.g., Sierles, Hendrickx, & Circel, 1980). More recently, Sims (1993) also found academic dis-honesty to be significantly related to employee theft and other forms of dishonesty at the workplace. Sim's findings suggest that people who engaged in dishonest behav-iors during their college days continue to do so in their professional careers. Further-more, Sim's findings indicate that people who engaged in dishonest behaviors during college are more likely to commit dishonest acts of greater severity at work. Existing research on academic dishonesty has largely been conducted in Eu-rope and North America. The results of these studies suggest that a large percent-age of university students indulge in some form of cheating behaviors during their undergraduate studies (e.g., Newstead, Franklyn-Stokes, & Armstead, 1996). Sur-vey findings also suggest that not only is student cheating pervasive, it is also ac-cepted by students as typical behavior (e.g., Faulkender et al., 1994). Although the research conducted in the Western context has increased our under-standing of academic dishonesty among students, the relevance of these results to the Asian context is questionable. Differences in sociocultural settings, demo-graphic composition, and specific educational policies may render some compari-sons meaningless. Different colleges also vary widely in fundamental ways, such as size, admission criteria, and learning climate. These factors render the comparabil-ity of results obtained from different campuses difficult. Cross-cultural studies con-ducted to examine students' attitudes toward academic dishonesty have found evidence that students of different nationalities and of different cultures vary signifi-cantly in their perceptions of cheating (e.g., Burns, Davis, Hoshino, & Miller, 1998; Davis, Noble, Zak, & Dreyer, 1994; Waugh, Godfrey, Evans, & Craig, 1995). For example, in their study of U.S., Japanese, and South African students, Burns et al. found evidence suggesting that the South Africans exhibited fewer cheating behav-iors than the Americans but more than the Japanese at the high school level. How-ever, at the college level, the cheating rates for South African students were lower compared to both their American and Japanese counterparts. In another cross-national study on academic dishonesty, Waugh et al. (1995) examined cheating behaviors and attitudes among students from six countries (Australia, the former East and West Germany, Costa Rica, the United States, and Austria) and found significant differences in their perceptions of cheating. Stu-
DOI link for ley, 1999). The impetus for understanding the underlying dynamics of dishonest behavior among students stems from the conviction that, apart from assuming the role of an educational and credentialing agency, the primary focus of an academic institution is to provide an environment for personal development of our youth in the moral, cognitive, physical, social, and aesthetic spheres. An atmosphere that promotes academic honesty and integrity is a precondition for generating, evaluat-ing, and discussing ideas in the pursuit of truth, which are at the very heart of aca-demic life. Research has shown that dishonesty in college, cheating in particular, is a predic-tor of unethical behavior in subsequent professional settings (e.g., Sierles, Hendrickx, & Circel, 1980). More recently, Sims (1993) also found academic dis-honesty to be significantly related to employee theft and other forms of dishonesty at the workplace. Sim's findings suggest that people who engaged in dishonest behav-iors during their college days continue to do so in their professional careers. Further-more, Sim's findings indicate that people who engaged in dishonest behaviors during college are more likely to commit dishonest acts of greater severity at work. Existing research on academic dishonesty has largely been conducted in Eu-rope and North America. The results of these studies suggest that a large percent-age of university students indulge in some form of cheating behaviors during their undergraduate studies (e.g., Newstead, Franklyn-Stokes, & Armstead, 1996). Sur-vey findings also suggest that not only is student cheating pervasive, it is also ac-cepted by students as typical behavior (e.g., Faulkender et al., 1994). Although the research conducted in the Western context has increased our under-standing of academic dishonesty among students, the relevance of these results to the Asian context is questionable. Differences in sociocultural settings, demo-graphic composition, and specific educational policies may render some compari-sons meaningless. Different colleges also vary widely in fundamental ways, such as size, admission criteria, and learning climate. These factors render the comparabil-ity of results obtained from different campuses difficult. Cross-cultural studies con-ducted to examine students' attitudes toward academic dishonesty have found evidence that students of different nationalities and of different cultures vary signifi-cantly in their perceptions of cheating (e.g., Burns, Davis, Hoshino, & Miller, 1998; Davis, Noble, Zak, & Dreyer, 1994; Waugh, Godfrey, Evans, & Craig, 1995). For example, in their study of U.S., Japanese, and South African students, Burns et al. found evidence suggesting that the South Africans exhibited fewer cheating behav-iors than the Americans but more than the Japanese at the high school level. How-ever, at the college level, the cheating rates for South African students were lower compared to both their American and Japanese counterparts. In another cross-national study on academic dishonesty, Waugh et al. (1995) examined cheating behaviors and attitudes among students from six countries (Australia, the former East and West Germany, Costa Rica, the United States, and Austria) and found significant differences in their perceptions of cheating. Stu-
ley, 1999). The impetus for understanding the underlying dynamics of dishonest behavior among students stems from the conviction that, apart from assuming the role of an educational and credentialing agency, the primary focus of an academic institution is to provide an environment for personal development of our youth in the moral, cognitive, physical, social, and aesthetic spheres. An atmosphere that promotes academic honesty and integrity is a precondition for generating, evaluat-ing, and discussing ideas in the pursuit of truth, which are at the very heart of aca-demic life. Research has shown that dishonesty in college, cheating in particular, is a predic-tor of unethical behavior in subsequent professional settings (e.g., Sierles, Hendrickx, & Circel, 1980). More recently, Sims (1993) also found academic dis-honesty to be significantly related to employee theft and other forms of dishonesty at the workplace. Sim's findings suggest that people who engaged in dishonest behav-iors during their college days continue to do so in their professional careers. Further-more, Sim's findings indicate that people who engaged in dishonest behaviors during college are more likely to commit dishonest acts of greater severity at work. Existing research on academic dishonesty has largely been conducted in Eu-rope and North America. The results of these studies suggest that a large percent-age of university students indulge in some form of cheating behaviors during their undergraduate studies (e.g., Newstead, Franklyn-Stokes, & Armstead, 1996). Sur-vey findings also suggest that not only is student cheating pervasive, it is also ac-cepted by students as typical behavior (e.g., Faulkender et al., 1994). Although the research conducted in the Western context has increased our under-standing of academic dishonesty among students, the relevance of these results to the Asian context is questionable. Differences in sociocultural settings, demo-graphic composition, and specific educational policies may render some compari-sons meaningless. Different colleges also vary widely in fundamental ways, such as size, admission criteria, and learning climate. These factors render the comparabil-ity of results obtained from different campuses difficult. Cross-cultural studies con-ducted to examine students' attitudes toward academic dishonesty have found evidence that students of different nationalities and of different cultures vary signifi-cantly in their perceptions of cheating (e.g., Burns, Davis, Hoshino, & Miller, 1998; Davis, Noble, Zak, & Dreyer, 1994; Waugh, Godfrey, Evans, & Craig, 1995). For example, in their study of U.S., Japanese, and South African students, Burns et al. found evidence suggesting that the South Africans exhibited fewer cheating behav-iors than the Americans but more than the Japanese at the high school level. How-ever, at the college level, the cheating rates for South African students were lower compared to both their American and Japanese counterparts. In another cross-national study on academic dishonesty, Waugh et al. (1995) examined cheating behaviors and attitudes among students from six countries (Australia, the former East and West Germany, Costa Rica, the United States, and Austria) and found significant differences in their perceptions of cheating. Stu-
ABSTRACT
In view of findings from these comparative studies, information on the topic of academic dishonesty in other countries, particularly Asian societies, is required to evaluate the applicability of findings and explanations of why this occurs in other cultures. This is especially important in an era in which school populations are becoming more diverse and student exchange programs are becoming more common. This study represents such an initial attempt.
