Lili Zhang

【Abstract】The author focuses on the phenomenon of cheating on exams on higher education level. The preferred approach to the issue covers modifying the exam form， stringent supervision during exams， and receiving consequences. Remember in mind the aim of punishment is to let students understand the importance of institutions values and the basic rules， rather than focusing on the punishment itself.

【Key words】cheating； exams； college； punishment

I. History of the issue

Many scholars have focused on the subject of college students' cheating on exams and conducted research and thinking about this behavior. For example， there are studies about using questionnaires and interviews to analyze behaviors and motives of cheating （Wan & Cao， 2002， p. 79）， studies about how to prevent and punish students that are cheating （Lai， 2006， p. 94）， and improving in education， teaching and school management against cheating （Wei， Long， Tang & Lei， 2004， p. 187）. There are also specific studies about how to reduce cheating. Rong Yu （2014） described how to do better in “ideological and political education” to decrease students cheating on the examinations. Ever Taderear （2014） used a case study to explain reducing cheating strategies.

Lijun Feng （2008） investigated the current situation of students' cheating in China using sophomores， juniors， and seniors in fifteen universities and colleges in nine of the big cities of China as the sample. The author handed out 1，000 questionnaires， and the actual response rate was 93%. In the question “Since entering college， have you ever cheated on an exam？” here are 45.4% of students who answered yes. In another survey， graduates in Israeli， were asked about cheating and the percentage of the sample who “considered cheating and actually did so on an exam during their first degree studies” and 43.76% （1752 samples） said yes （Siniver， 2013， p. 593）. The findings from these studies demonstrate that cheating may have a certain universality in colleges. Feng （2008） reported that， 20.9% of the students “thought， but did not dare to cheat”， which may indicate potential cheating tendencies. And in Sinivers （2013） survey the rate of graduates who wanted to cheat was up to 42.79%.

Fengs（2008）survey noted how cheating was practiced and found that 45% of students looked around or took a peek at another students paper， the rate of “to entrain book or piece of paper” was 22.0%， “to copy on a pencil case or on the table” was 16.7%， “to use communication tools or electronic dictionary” was 14.0% （Feng， 2008）. The rate of other methods of cheating was 2.3%. From this survey， the findings showed that students using traditional （no technology） means of cheating accounted for a high proportion of cheating methods with more than 80% of respondents noting some form of cheating.

Clabaugh & Rozycki （2009） thought the form of cheating in exams was becoming more and more complicated. However， Mokula & Lovemore （2014） summed up the traditional forms of cheating are “crib notes” and “leakages of examination materials.” Technology has become a tool more and more effective for cheating. For example， Mokula & Lovemore （2014） mentioned the application of “a telephone transmission system which enable candidates to communicate examination questions to a third party outside the examination venue who inturn transmitted the answers via the same device” and “the use of watches that are filled with tiny cameras to photograph examination questions which are solved by experts and then relayed to candidates”. There are also hackers contributing to the cheating. The data presented in this section showed that more than half of cheaters did not study hard and just wanted to pass the exam. From Fengs survey， the cheating motivations of college students varied from high to low proportion and are listed as： （a） passing and avoiding rehabilitation 55%， （b） making parents and teachers satisfied account for 22%， （c） owning high marks， getting a scholarship 17%， （d） ambient atmosphere influence 6%. About a quarter of students cheated to avoid disappointing parents and teachers. The studies seem to indicate that students lack motivation to study and have no deep understanding of the implications of cheating. Students view cheating as a simple and convenient way to pass.

II. Parameters， scope and effects of the issue

I have been working as a faculty member at my college for seven years. I served as the supervisor twice every year in the final exams and many times during periodic tests. In the course of examinations or tests I found that students cheating is a persistent problem. We have strict policies and regulations against academic dishonesty at my college. Once a student is identified as cheating， the student is subject to heavy penalties， possibly placed on probation or expelled. Because of the heavy penalties that could be imposed， the faculty was emotionally impacted when they found students cheated. Some faculty preferred not to identify the students who cheated.

Last year， Yao was appointed as the new director of academic affairs in my college. I interviewed him and learned that he modified the academic honesty regulations after he took office. He divided the penalties into warning， demerit， probation and expulsion， which made the penalties more level and more scientific. During the next year if the punished students demonstrated good performance in their academic life， they could apply to have the bad record canceled. It looks more humane for students and more bearable for faculty. Students have a deeper understanding of cheating and faulty can catch and turn in students who cheat without feeling guilty.

Cheating is a serious issue because it undermines the principle of fair competition （Lai， 2006， p. 94） and impacts both students and faculty. As a hypothetical example， assume student A successfully cheats on an exam. Student A， if successful， might feel very fortunate or want to cheat the next time， because this is an easy way to achieve a good score. Other students may recognize that student A cheated without being caught and they might think studying hard is not a better option than cheating. Student A or classmates around him speculate about academic dishonesty and may lead students to take unfair means of competition in the future when they enter into society.

III. Approaches to dealing with the issue

The research literature presented some good methods to reduce or resolve cheating. Some suggestions involve “more severe punishment” （Siniver， 2013， p. 593）， “more stringent supervision” （Siniver， 2013， p. 593） and changes to the exam form （Lai， 2006， p. 94）. The more severe punishment and more stringent supervision were thought to be the two most effective ways according to Siniver （2013）. However， aligning curriculum and assessment may mean exploring different kinds of examinations. For example， change a closed-book exam to open-book exam， a discussion， social practice reports or a project study. Changing the exam format may make cheating more difficult.

IV. My preferred approach to the issue

I am personally opposed to cheating and believe we should first modify the exam form. If that is not an option， use more stringent supervision during exams. The instructor has a responsibility to ensure integrity through the whole teaching course. Remind the students that they do not want to drive on a roller coaster or a bridge that was built by someone that cheated. They want to ride a roller coaster or drive on a bridge that was built by someone that worked hard to build it properly. If there are still students who are caught during the examination， they must receive consequences， yet still have future opportunities to mend their record. Give them a chance to correct if in the later period their behavior meets the requirements. They can apply to cancel the bad record. So， students can learn from their mistakes and turn over a new leaf. It also facilitates the students success when they apply for a job after they graduate. No one wants to be plagued by bad cheating records. I think the main purpose of our punishment is to let students understand the importance of our values and the basic rules， rather than focusing on the punishment itself.

References：

[1]Wan，M.，& Cao，H.（2002）.Students' Cheating Behavior.Higher Science Education，3，79-84.

[2]Lai，X.（2006）.On Students' Cheating and control.Jiangsu Higher Education，3，94-96.

[3]Wei，X.，Long，P.，Tang，X.，& Lei，Y.（2004）.From cheating to look at education in colleges.Higher Education Forum，5，187-190.

[4]Yu，R.（2014）.The Research on the Problem of Ideological and Political College Based on Cheating in the Exam.2014 IEEE Workshop on Electronics，Computer and Application.51-52.

[5]Taderera，E.，Nyikahadzoi，L.，Matamande，W.，& Mandimika，E.（2014）.Exploring Management Strategies to Reduce Cheating in Written Examinations：Case Study of Midlands State University.Journal of Case Studies in Education，5，1-13.

[6]Feng，L.（2008）.Investigation and Research of Contemporary College Students Cheating in exams.hejiang Statistics，1，26-28.

[7]Clabaugh，G.K.& Rozycki，E.G.（2009）.Preventing cheating sand plagiarism.Orlando，PA：New Foundations Press.

[8]Mokula，L.L.D.，& Lovemore，N.（2014）.Forms，Factors，and Consequence of Cheating in University Examinations：Insight from Open and Distance Learning Students.Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education，15（4），259-280.

[9]Siniver，E.（2013）.Cheating on Exams：The Case of Israeli Students.College Student Journal，47（4），593-604.