influence of family socio-economic status, gender …
TRANSCRIPT
INFLUENCE OF FAMILY SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, GENDER AND
SCHOOL LOCATION ON STUDENTS PERCEPTION OF EXAMINATION
MALPRACTICE.
M.SC PROJECT PROPOSAL
BY
EZE DAMIAN C.
PG/M.SC/07/43647
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
FACULTY OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA.
SUPERVISOR: DR. E.C. ONYENEJE
MAY, 2010.
TITLE PAGE
Influence of Family Socio-Economic Status, Gender And School
Location on Students Perception of Examination Malpractice.
BY
Eze, Damian C.
PG/M.SC/07/43647
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of
master of science (M.Sc)
In
Social Psychology
Department of Psychology
Faculty of the Social Sciences
University of Nigeria, Nsukka
Supervisor: Dr. E.C. Onyeneje
May, 2010
CERTIFICATION.
Eze, Damian Chinwuba a postgraduate student in the Department of
Psychology, University of Nigeria, Nsukka and with Registration Number
PG/M.Sc/07/43647 has satisfactorily completed the requirements for course
work and comprehensive research work for the Degree of M.Sc. in Psychology
(Social Psychology). The work embodied in this thesis report is original and has
not been submitted in part or full for any other Diploma or Degree of this or any
other university.
_____________________ __________________
Dr. L.I. Ugwu Dr. E.C. Onyeneje
(Head of Department). (Supervisor).
______________________
External Examiner.
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to the Almighty God for making it possible for me
to bring this project to an end, and to my amiable wife who had been supportive
to me through out the period of this research work.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am highly indebted to everyone who directly or indirectly made this
research work a huge success. My highest regards to my Supervisors, Dr. E.C
Onyeneje and Dr. Ernest Ike Onyishi for their academic drilling during this
research work, that has succeeded in bring out the best in me, academically.
Moreover, I am grateful to my lecturers in the Department of Psychology
University of Nigeria, Nsukka for their constructive criticism during my M.Sc
proposal.
I also extend my gratitude to all the academic and non academic staff of
Department of Psychology University of Nigeria, Nsukka for making this dream
a reality. I cannot thank enough all my fellow Post Graduate Students whose
collaborative roles propelled me to this greater height, most importantly, to Mr.
Chiedozie Okafor, for his mentoring role during this period of work.
Last but not the least, my unalloyed gratitude goes to my noble parents
Mr. Eze Daniel Ibebuike and Mrs. Benedict Eze for providing me with all the
parental care which is the most essential ingredients necessary for the
accomplishment of this great task; I thank then immensely. Also, I will not fail
to extend my greeting to my brothers and sisters including all my well wishers
where ever they are for their fervent prayers during the time of this research.
Once more, I say thank you all, and may God Almighty bless all of you
abundantly.
Finally, I sincerely thank the principals, teachers, including the students
of all the six secondary schools that participated in this work for their selfless
efforts to make sure that this project comes to a logical conclusion.
ABSTRACT
The study of investigated Influence of Family Socio-Economic Status, Gender and school location on students’ perception of examination malpractices. Three hindered and frothy-six secondary school (ss1) students participated in the study. Participants were within the age range of 14 and 18 years with a mean age of sixteen years. Three hypotheses were tested. Hypothesis 1 states that there will be no statistically significant difference in perception of examination malpractices between participants of high socio-economic status and those of low socio-economic status; hypothesis 2 states that, there will be no statistically significant gender differences in perception of examination malpractices and hypothesis 3 states that, there will be no statistically significant difference in perception of examination malpractice between participants from schools in rural areas and participants from schools in urban areas. Data analysis using 3-way ANOVA indicate significant main influence of family socio-economic status, F(1,338) = 5.49, P < 0.5, and gender F (1,338) = 4.84, P <. 05,on students, perception of examination malpractices. The result reveal significant interaction of family socio-economic status and school location on students’ perception of examination malpractices, F (1, 338) = 7, 55, P <. 0.5. The result were discussed in terms of their relevance to improve the quality of education in Nigeria.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page i
Certification ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgment iv
Table of Contents v
List of Table Contents vi
List of Figure vii
List of Appendices viii
Abstract ix
Chapter One: Introduction 1
Statement of the problem 7
Purpose of the Study 9
Operational Definition of Terms 9
Chapter Two: Literature Review 11
Theoretical Review 11
Empirical Review 20
Summary of Literature Review 27
Hypotheses. 28
Chapter Three: Methods 29
Participants 29
Instrument 31
Procedure 32
Design/statistic 33
Chapter Four: Results 34
Chapter Five: Discussion 39
Limitation 42
Suggestion for Further Research 42
Conclusion 43
References
Appendices.
Autobiography
LIST OF TABLES
1. Mean and standard deviation of influence of socio-economic status,
gender and school location on students’ perception of examination
malpractices
2. ANOVA summary of Influence of family socio-economic status gender
and school location on students’ perception of examination malpractices.
LIST OF FIGURE
1. Graph indicate significant interaction of family socio-economic status and
school location on students’ perception of examination malpractices.
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A : Exam Malpractice questionnaire
Appendix B: Examination Malpractice Scale.
Appendix C : Univariate Analysis result
Appendix D: Mean Metric of Influence of family socio-economic status,
gender and school location on students’ perception of examination malpractices.
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION
The phenomenon of corruption is not of recent origin. The origin of
corruption has been traced back to the time of the Greek and the Roman
empires. Corruption is said to have been so prevalent during these period of
time that the governments of those days had to privatize tax collections by
auctioning the rights to collect taxes to private citizens (Fashola, 2008). Fashola
further stated that the prevalence of corruption in democratic England was also
said to account for the professionalization of the civil service in that country in
the nineteenth century. Africa, however, come under the eyes of the storm
during the post-colonial era when writers and commentators linked the
prevalence of corruption in most African countries to the pre-colonial cultural
practices, and the weak economic and institutional structures (Fashola, 2009).
Corruption is one of the few social problems that is widespread in
Nigeria. By its nature and character, it is destructive, unethical, and could affect
the rate of social development, the term corruption covers several immoral acts.
It could be abuse of public office for personal gains or any other illegal or
immoral acts which a person engages in, for private gains. Corrupt practices in
Nigeria context include offer and acceptance of bribe, fraudulent acquisition of
property, offer and acceptance of any gratification or inducement, favoritism,
nepotism, corrupt enrichment, contract inflation. Examination malpractices,
Electoral fraud only to mention but few (Adeniran, 2009).
This study examines corruption from the point of view of examination
malpractice. Examination is an academic exercise designed to obtain
information about those who are examined. Tyler (1971) and Nunally (1972)
defined examination as a standard situation designed to elicit a sample of an
individual’s behaviour. Fagbamiye (1998) described examination as a tool for
measuring and judging the standard of education in any country. It is believed
that no country can rise above the level of her educational standards, no matter
the political propaganda or economic manipulation, except such as country
fashions out a dynamic educational system matched with valid and reliable
testing programmes. In other words, without valid and reliable examinations
and results, there can be no national development either socially, economically,
scientifically or technologically.
In the last five decades, according to Oluwatayo (2006), it could be
observed that Nigeria has made concerted efforts at providing qualitative
education for her citizens which had led to the establishment of a number of
examination bodies to monitor and maintain educational standards, encourage a
learning society, identify special talents within the population and control
curricula. They conduct such examinations as may be considered appropriate
and award certificates on the results of the examination conducted (Nwana,
1982; Oluwatayo, 2004). Prominent among the examination bodies are the West
African Examinations Council (WAEC) established in 1952, the National
Teacher’s Institute (NTI) established in 1978; the National Business and
Technical Education Board (NABTEB) established in 1992 and the National
Board for Educational Measurement (NBEM) established in 1992 but later
transformed to National Examinations Council (NECO) in 1998. The essence
of public examinations is to provide equal opportunities to all members of the
society irrespective of the type of education they have acquired (Okpala,
Onocha, & Oyedeji, 1993; Faloyajo & Makoju, 1997; Ojerinde, 2000).
Essentially, the public examination boards are concerned with large scale testing
programmes resulting in a large number of candidates sitting for the
examinations since restriction of candidates is minimal (Ojerinde, 2000).
Unfortunately, according to Ikegbunna (1996), the public examination
boards lay emphasis on certification as an end in itself and not a means to an
end. This is the crux of the matter because very typical Nigerian is now over-
conscious of examinations and tends to believe implicitly in the certificates and
paper qualification so necessary for admission into higher institutions of
learning. One of the major problems facing examinations, particularly public
examination such as the senior school certificate examination (SSCE)
conducted by WAEC and NECO, is the notorious examination malpractices
among the candidates. According to Oluyeba (1998), examination malpractice
occurs in its various forms throughout Nigeria and there is no state that could be
exonerated from it.
The pattern of examination malpractices ranges from impersonation to
smuggling of already prepared answers written by others into the examination
hall. Corporate cheating by the candidates, concealing of notes in private parts,
use of mobile phones, use of electronic computers and other unethical
behaviours. Studies by Oluyeba (1998), Faganiye (1998) and Adetunberu
(1998) showed that the rate of examination malpractice is at its peak in the
southern part of Nigeria while those state recorded the lowest percentage of
cases of examination malpractices are in the northern part of Nigeria
(Oluwatoya, 2006).
Alutu and Aluede (2006) defined examination malpractices as an illegal
or unethical behavior by somebody in the process of testing an examinee’s
ability or knowledge by means of question. Oluyeba and Daramola (1992)
remarked that examination malpractice include the following: examination
malpractice is any irregular behavior exhibited by a candidate or anybody
charged with the conduct of examination before during or after the examination
which contravenes the rules and regulation governing the conduct of such
examination. Such examination malpractices will include any of the following:
examination leakage, impersonation, cheating, collusion, swapping of scripts,
smuggling of answer script in examination halls, results/certificate forgery,
verbal/physical assault on examination administrators. Similarly, Kibler (1988,
as cited in Kibler 1993) defined examination mal-practices 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.
Examination malpractice, which is a perennial problem in higher
education, is of interest to educators, researchers and the general public alike.
This interest stems from the fact that academic integrity is a desirable
characteristic for students and one that institutions strive to model. There is
already a rather large literature on the subject, much of it reporting some of the
motive that give rise to the behavior. Other reports focus on the correlates and
remedies of examination malpractice. However, most of such studies, especially
in Nigeria, including Hassan (1987), Adeyinka (1993) and Olasehinde (1993),
employed mainly the survey technique in collecting data. Since the survey
technique is inherently subjective, findings based on the technique must be
accepted with caution (Johnson & Gormly, 1972). More empirical research is
therefore needed to understand the problem of examination malpractice in
examinations and how to deal with it.
Unfortunately, such empirical studies are hard to come by in this country.
This study was thus initiated to empirically determine variable which may
predispose students to cheat in examination. A number of studies have
attempted to discern those characteristics and circumstances, which ‘predispose’
some students to engage in cheating. Some important variables that have been
investigated include the student’ gender, age, previous academic performance
and so on. Although some significant correlations between these variable and
examination malpractice have been reported, research does not appear to be
conclusive in establishing the significant of any of such variable in explaining
student’ tendency to examination malpractice. For instance, research on gender
difference in examination malpractice has yielded inconsistent results. While
several studies reported that males indulge in examination malpractice more
than females (eg. Lobel & Levanon, 1988; Ward & Beck, 1989; Davis, Grover,
Becker & McGregor, 1992; Lobel, 1993), others found that females exhibited
more examination malpractice than males (e.g. Leming, 1980) or that there were
no statistically significant different between male and female student in
examination malpractice (e.g. Haines, Diekhoff, Labeff & Clark, 1986; Evans &
Craig, 1990). Similarly, while Drake (1941) Barnett and Dalton (1981) as well
as Haines, Diekhoff, LaBeff and Clark (1986) reported that students of low
academic ability cheat more than student of high academic ability, leming
(1980) found no such significant difference between these categories of
students.
It was considered important by the present researchers to also look for
fundamental force in students’ tendency to indulge in examination malpractice.
This was considered worthwhile in order to more fully understand the
attitudinal process involves in examination malpractice. For this purpose,
environment and socio-economic status will be considered jointly with gender
differences.
Adepoju (2008) posits that the environment (urban or rural, which a child
finds himself in, goes a long way in determining his learning ability and
ultimately his academic performance in school. The observation of Ayodele
(2000) “that learners are not performing well could not be attributed to natural
dunces but most evidently because the environments created for them are not
much more conducive to learning” is an affirmation of this fact. Fagbamiye
(1977) in a study on secondary school in Lagos state also discovered that
although school factors are stronger determination of school academic
performance, they are offshoots of the socio-economic factors as far as Nigeria
is concerned. He maintained further that because children from more privilege
homes usually attend private primary institutions where all round educational
foundation is ensured, they thus end up in secondary school with adequate
educational resources and a record of good academic performance. Such
fortunate children cannot but perform better in their final examinations.
Statement of the Problem
Since the end of the civil war in Nigeria, examination malpractice has
been on the increase. This is not limited to a particular types of examination.
The scourge is common to both internal, external and entrance examinations to
tertiary institutions. In 2007 for example, the Minster of Education De-
recognized many secondary Schools and banned them from writing both the
May/June and Nov/December examinations because of their involvement in
gross examination malpractices in the 2006 West African Senior Secondary
School Certificate Examination, (FME, 2007).
A lot of factors have been observed to have influenced the students into
examination malpractice. Some of these factors are parent’s financial
sponsorship of the malpractice, school environment and the government loose
attribute to corruption (Bosah, 2007).
There have been series of blames from the government on the teachers for
the incidence of examination malpractice (Okoye, 2008). However parents point
accusing fingers to the teachers and the government for the scourge (Ude,
2007). Ude maintained that examination malpractice is more prevalent in the
rural schools than the urban schools. Considering the fact that an average
Nigeria is corrupt, it has been difficult to say who and who should be
prosecuted for the incidence of examination malpractice. However, the
researcher would want to know the role of gender when parental influences and
environment are put into consideration. To this end, this research is set to
investigate the following problems.
1) Will participants with high family socio-economic status differ
significantly with participants with low family socio-economic status on
perception of examination malpractice?
2) Will male participants differ significantly from female participants on
perception of examination malpractice?
3) Will participants from urban area differ significantly with participants
from rural areas on perception of examination malpractices?
Purpose of the Study.
The purpose of this study is to empirically investigate whether parental
socio-economic status, gender and school location would influence students’
perception of examination malpractices.
Operational Definition of Terms
Perception of Examination Malpractices: This refers to a participants scores
in the Examination Malpractice Questionnaire (EMQ) developed by Alutu and
Aluede (2006) and validated for use in this study by the researcher.
Gender: This refers to male or female SSI student.
Socio-economic Status: This refers to the financial strength of a participant’s
care giver (s) as measured by Socio-economic status scale developed by the
researcher.
High Family Socio-Economic Status: This refers to participants whose care
givers are wealthy enough to maintain high standard of living as measured by
the socio-economic status scale developed by the researcher.
Low Family Socio-Economic Status: This refers to participants whose care
givers are not wealthy enough to maintain high standard of living as measured
by socio-economic status scale developed by the researcher.
School Location: This refers to rural or urban location.
CHAPTER TWO:
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter reviews some of the related literatures to the topic in
question. It starts with review of relevant theories that give explanations to
human malpractices. Then comes the review of some of the studies conducted
to test the theories.
Theoretical Review
The following theories are reviewed in the first section of this chapter.
1. Observational Learning theory
2. Theory of Needs Hierarchy
3. Social Structure theory
Observation Learning Theory
Corruption is not a new phenomenon in Nigeria. Evidence of corruption
predates the birth of the first republic in 1960 way into the colonial era-but these
were usually isolated cases. In order to facilitate a discussion of the link
between observational learning processes and the prevalence of corruption, it is
pertinent to give a brief description of the basic postulate of observational
learning theory. According to Bandura (1986) much of what we learn is
obtained by observing others, and that this is much more efficient than learning
through direct experience because it spares us countless responses that might be
followed by punishment or no reinforcement of any kind. The people whose
behavior is observed are referred to as models.
Learning through modeling involves cognitive processes and is not based
simply on imitation since the learning adds and subtracts from the observed
behaviour and generalizes from one observation to another. Certain factors
determine whether we are going to learn from a model in a given situation or
not. One of the key moderators, according to Bandura, is the characteristics of
the model; we are more likely to model powerful people than inept ones, high
status people rather those of low status, and so forth. A second moderator
variable concerns the characteristics of the observer. People of low status,
education, or power are more likely to model than people high in these
attributes.
A third factor refers to the consequence of the observed behavior on the
model. If the person greatly values the behavior being observed, there is greater
likelihood that is will be modeled. But even of more crucial importance for the
researcher is the impact on learning when a model is punished (or not
punished) for a given behavior. Observers learn to refrain from modeling a
behaviour that produces severe punishment to the model. For examples, a
person who sees another being punished for corruption might not wait to receive
the same punishment before deciding to refrain from the activity. However,
when a corrupt practice is not punished, as observed in Nigeria,observers do not
think of refraining from it. In a petition forwarded to the chairman of the
independent corrupt practices commission (ICPC) by Ike Onychere, executive
Chairman, Exam Ethics project, a Non-Government organization in Nigeria, at
least 5,000 students, principles, invigilators, teachers, supervisors, and
examiners have so far been reported for their involvement in examination
malpractices, yet not a single person has been convicted till date (The Nation,
2009). What will be the nature of future malpractices?
Bandura (1986,1988) identified four main process that are crucial for
observational learning: attention, retention/representation, behavioural
production, and motivation. In order to learn through observation, you must
attend to the model actors that regulated attention including the frequency with
which we associate with people, whether or not we are attracted to them, and
whether we think the behavior is important and can yield some profit to us.
Second, we must be able to make some mental representation of what we have
witnessed in memory, since we may not have the occasion to use an observed
behavior for up to several years. Behavioural production involves the process of
converting the mental representation into appropriate actions. For instance, you
may remember that someone cheated on his taxes or embezzled money that was
entrusted under his/her care, but can you perform the same feat?.
Observation learning is most affective e when observers are motivated to
enact the modeled behavior. Your motivation may depend on whether you
encounter a situation in which you believe that the response is likely to lead to
favourable consequences for you. So how does this explain the prevalence of
corruption in Nigeria?
Beginning with the basic process, it is obvious that many Nigerians, see
cases of corruption everywhere. Many of the kickbacks received by top officials
go through intermediaries, some of who are subordinates of these officials.
People who are hitherto living from hand to mouth often begin to build houses
and are commonly seen driving around in flashy cars shortly after being
appointed to “Lucrative” positions that grant them access to public funds or
influence. Therefore, attending to the behavior of the model is not a problem
here. It is also certain that these people are able to remember the corrupt
activities that they have observed.
The second important issues about observational learning involves the
factors that determine whether or not a particular behavior will be modeled. The
researcher indicated earlier that one of the key determinants relates to the
consequences of the model for engaging in specific behavior. The question one
may ask is; “What typically happens to people who engage in corruption in
Nigeria?” The answer is hardly anything at all. People clearly see individual,
not including, but especially the military, whose only source of income is
supposedly the salary, living up to several times above their means. Yet, few, if
any of these people are ever questioned, let alone tried for these apparent
corrupt practices. Once in a while when a top official it retired, rumors go on for
some time that the retirement was due to embezzlement, but it remains at the
level of rumors. The official announcements usually indicate something like
“Retired in the public interest,” but these people are often allowed to keep their
questionably acquired wealth.
Theory of Hierarchy of Needs.
There is a general consensus that corruption in Nigeria is at an all-time
high. It is common to hear people remark that you can not trust anyone in
Nigeria anymore. Why this dramatic increase in the rate of corruption in
Nigeria? Although the prevalence of corruption can be explained in part by
observational learning, this theory seems inadequate to explain this steep rise in
corruption. It is the contention of the researcher that the concept of hierarchy of
needs gives a better account of this proliferation. As with observational learning
theory, a brief description of the concept might be necessary to affectively
espouse this connection.
The concept of hierarchy of needs derives from Maslow’s (1943, 1970)
more general theory of motivation is based on the assumption that people are
persistently motivated by one need or another. When one need is satisfied, it
ordinarily loses its motivational power and is replaced by another one. Thus, as
long as people’s hunger needs are frustrated, they will strive for food, but once
they have enough food, they move to other needs such as housing. According to
Maslow, basic or lower-level needs must be satisfied at least to some reasonable
degree before higher-level needs become motivations. What this means
essentially is that needs are arranged on a sort of a ladder, with each ascending
step representing a higher need, but one less basic to survival. Lower needs
must be satisfied in order for people to strive for higher needs. Thus, a person
who holds an office job may be satisfying higher-level needs such as esteem,
but if he or she becomes hungry, will leave his /her work in search of food. The
following are Maslow’s need in order of prepotency (predominance):
physiological, safety, love and belongingness, esteem, and self-actualization.
Physiological needs include food, water, oxygen, and so forth. They are the
most basic or proponent of all. People who are truly hungry are motivated to
eat, not make friends or gain prestige. People from affluent societies have their
hunger needs satisfied as a matter of course, so when they say they are hungry,
they are really talking about appetite; a hungry person is unlikely to be fussy
about the temperature or texture of food.
Physiological needs are different from other needs in at least two
important ways, first, they are the only needs that can be completely satisfied.
However, they also have the attribute of recurrence. Even when we have had
more than enough to eat, we will eventually get hungry and have to eat again.
The other needs do not constantly reoccur. When the physiological needs are
fairly satisfied, we become motivated by safety needs, including physical
security, law and order, freedom from threats of illness, danger, anxiety and so
forth.
Love and belongingness needs are next after safety and include the desire
for friendship, the wish for a mate and children, the need to belong to a club,
and so forth, once these are satisfied, people then move to pursue esteem needs,
such as confidence, self-respect, and the esteem of others. The final step is the
move to self-actualization which Maslow suggest is not an automatic step. In
fact, he contends that very few people step over this threshold. A very essential
component of this postulation relates to the fact that even if one attains the
upper-level needs, once the lower, more basic needs are deprived, the person
ignores the higher needs in order to address the basic one. How does one apply
this to the proliferation of corruption in Nigeria? Until a few years ago, most of
the basic needs on Maslow’s hierarchy were adequately satisfied by a majority
of Nigerians. People had enough food to eat, and could fulfill their basic needs.
In fact, in the case of a majority of officer-level personnel, most of the safety
and to some extent belongingness needs were also met. A sizeable proportion of
the people were striving for esteem needs, it could seem. Then beginning
gradually during the waning days of the Shagari regime in 1983, and through
the various structural adjustment programs involving devaluation of the naira,
the resultant inflation, massive reduction in the work force, and so forth, the
quality of live for most Nigerians by a quantum leap.
Many senior civil savants and even people in the private sector can barely
make ends meet. A good proportion of worker’s salaries cannot adequately
cover the food costs, tuition fees, transportation to work, and other basic
amenities. Prior to now, a good percentage of people had climbed up the ladder
of needs and were striving for such upper-level needs as esteem and recognition.
University lecturers could think of publishing and being competitively place
with colleagues at similar level in other countries. People within the regular
civil service could aspire to reach the top in their various area of service in order
to have that sense of fulfillment, school and university student would also aspire
to be successful in their exams since it is the only way to the “big tops”. It was
conceivable then to see how these kinds of people would ignore the corrupt
route to the top, because it would tarnish that for which they fervently aspired. It
would appear that these most basic need are now deprived and therefore, people
are no longer worried about self-respect or recognition to the same degree, since
the lower needs must first satisfied.
Even the involvement of people who appear to be well off can still be
explained under this theory because of the perceived uncertainly of their
situation. According to Maslow, thwarting of basic needs leads to some kind of
pathology that can result in people lying, cheating, stealing, or eve killing. It
appears that what is important is not so much the availability of the resource
necessary to satisfy the need in questions, but the confidence that it will be there
when needed. People who live in area that are at war live in constant fear even
when their homes are not in the process of being attacked because they know
that this can happened at any time. In like manner, the person who seems to
have enough but continues to engage in corrupt activities may be doing so
because of the uncertainty of his or her position and thus may want to accurate
as much as possible so that even when the job or status is not there tomorrow,
he or she may still have the means to support self and family. Thus, the
accumulation constitutes a pathology arising from the fear of being deprived of
physiological and safety needs. Since job security was high and pensions were
adequate for the basic need of most retirees in the era prior to the proliferation
of corruption, it is plausible that this factor may be responsible, at least in part,
for the current proliferation of corruption in Nigeria.
Social Structure Theory
Merton (1989) emphasizes social structure as a major determinant of
anomie and corruption. According to Merton, deviance and malpractice in the
United State results mostly from the culture and structure of society itself rather
than from pathological personalities. He takes his stand from the standard
functionalist concept of “value consensus”, by which all members of a society
share the same value. According to Merton, in a balance society equal emphasis
is accorded to both cultural goals and institutionalized means of achieving such
goals. However, due to different member of society being place in varying
position within the social structure (e.g differing in term of class positions), they
therefore, experience differential opportunity for realizing their share values.
Hence, in Merton’s view “the social and cultural structure generates pressure for
socially deviant behavior upon people variously located in that structure” (p.
139).
From this point of view, Nigerian society has in common the shared goals
of success. All Nigerians strive for this goal and success in this context is
generally measured in term of wealth and material goods. However, in
comparison to the high level of sharing of the cultural goal of success, a much
lower level of important is allocated to common adherence to the
institutionalized means of achieving success. For instance, educational
qualification, hard work, drive, determination and ambition are generally
accepted in Nigeria as the means of success. However, there seems little or no
consensus on how to apply these means to obtaining success. Hence, to the
average Nigerian, examination malpractice constitutes techniques for obtaining
educational qualifications, which is an institutionalized means for obtaining
success.
EMPIRICAL REVIEW
A number of studies have attempted to discern those characteristics and
circumstances, which predispose’ some students to engage in examination
malpractice. Some important variables that have been investigated include the
students’ gender age, socio-economic status, environment (Location), academic
performance.
Gender and Examination Malpractice.
Although some significant correlations between these variable and exam
malpractice have been reported research does not appear to be conclusive in
establishing the significance of any of such variable in explaining student’s
tendency to engage in exam malpractice. For instance, research on gender
differences in examination has yielded inconsistent result. While several studies
reported that males “cheated” more than females (e.g Lobel & Levanon, 1988;
Ward & Beck, 1989; Davis, Grover, Becker & McGregor, 1992; Lobel, 1993),
others found that females exhibited more cheating behavior than males (e.g.
Leming, 1980) or that there were no statistically significant difference between
male and female student in cheating behaviour. (e.g. Haines, Diekhoff, Labeff
& Clark, 1986; Evans & Craig, 1990). Similarly, while Drake (1941) Barnet,
and Dolton (1981) as well as Haines, Diekhoff, LaBeff and Clark (1986)
reported that student of low academic ability cheat more than students of high
academic ability, Leming (1980) found no such significant different between
these categories of students.
In recent times, there have been attempts to establish a relationship
between high levels of women in politics and less corruption resulting from
their presence and influence. Key paper expounding on this theme are: Swampy,
Kanck, Lee and Azfer (2001) and Dollae, Fishman and Gatti (1999). These
researches have documented systematic gender differences in behaviour. They
gave evidences that suggest that women may be more relationship-oriented,
may have higher standard of ethical behaviour and may be more concerned with
the common good than men are. These studies observed that gender differences
might be attributed to socialization, or to differences in access to networks of
corruption or in knowledge of how to engage in corrupt practices, or to other
factors.
Dollar, Fishman and Gatti (1991) analyzed data for more than 100
countries, and found a strong negative and statistically significant relationship
between the level of female participation in politics-measured by the percentage
of seats occupied by women in the lower and upper chambers-and a corruption
index. They uses the international country Risk Guide’s corruption index. Using
such findings, the authors hypothesized that increasing participation of women
in government and legislature would negatively and significantly influence the
level of perceived corruption. Three variables of women’s participation in
public life were used. The first is a number of women in legislature. They
expected that large number of women reduce the level of bribes given to MPS;
positively influence legislature by voting for laws that deter corruptions; and
place issues of wider public concern on government’s agenda such as health and
social issues. The second variable is number of women in government, such as
those in ministerial positions and high-level civil servant appointments. They
expected that female heads would reduce level of tolerance for petty corruption.
The third variable is number of women in labour force, which correlate with
previous variables, that is, the higher the number of women in labour force the
more likely their higher representation in public life.
The result showed that both female participation in governance and the
level of corruption are highly correlated with a level of socio-economic
development; the more developed is the country, the more women participate in
governance and the lower the level of perceived corruption.
Environment and Examination Malpractice.
The environment (Rural or Urban) in which a student finds himself or
herself in, goes a long way in determining his or her learning ability and
preparedness to cheat in general examinations. Adepoju (2002) in a study on
locational factors, private cost and academic performance of secondary school
students in Oyo State, Nigeria found that a significant difference existed in the
academic performance of students in urban and rural secondary school
particularly in English Language and Mathematics using a stepwise regression
analysis (Bachward procedure) method. The result of the student also revealed
that locational factors as a group did not contribute significantly to the academic
performance in English Language and Mathematics.
Ojoawo (1989) and Adepoju (2002) both found in their separate studies
that location of school had significant effect on school academic performance
and that there was a significance difference in performance and academic self-
confidence between rural and urban schools. Owoey (2002) in his study evealed
that school facilities were found to be the most potent determinant of academic
success in SSCE when taken together, whereas, Ofoegbu (1998) found that
school-home distance affects students academic performance and intellectual
superiority.
Motivation, Socio-Economic Status, Learning and Exam Malpractices.
Motivation has been placed on records as a potent factor that can predict
academic performance of students both at the secondary and tertiary levels of
education. For instance, various studies (Broussard & Garrison, 2004; Skaalvik
& Skaalvik, 2004, 2006; Sandra, 2002) revealed a significant relationship
between academic performance and motivation. In a metra-analysis of
numerous educational and psychological studies, Uguroglu and Walbery (1979)
concluded that the mean correlation between motivation and learning measures
is. 338. Uguroglu and Walbery Looked at younger students and found that the
prediction measures improve in the higher grades. In research on college
students, Grabe and Latta (1981) found that motivation strongly predicted
achievement, with the prediction higher for male students than female student.
Cote and Levine (2002) concluded that motivation was a stronger predictor of
college achievement than intelligence as measured by IQ score.
In the study of Ryan and Decil (2000), two factors theorized to contribute
to students’ academic success are academic self-efficacy and support from
parents, teachers, and school counselors for autonomous learning. Awanbor
(2005) argues that the problem secondary school students face in respect to their
learning is lack of motivation. Rusillo and Arias (2004) posit that there is
significant influence of academic motivation on learning at school Awanbor
(2005) holds that student who lack sufficient level of academic motivation
exhibit a weak drive towards the pursuit of academic goals. Such student
manifest signs and symptoms of indifference and apathy towards schools. The
majority of such students, if not all, are those who are involved in examination
malpractices (Awanbor, 2005).
Christiana’s (2008) study showed that student need to be motivated both
intrinsically and extrinsically. Both ways of motivation are necessary for a
better academic performance, and the more students are motivated the better
chance of their academic performance. The finding of here study agrees with the
finding of Afolabi and Imhonds (2003) that what counts for the difference in
performance of an individual in doing something is usually the level of
motivate.
In another study of Scales and Roehlk Partain (2003), the result of their
study with Colorado Springs 9th grades concluded that comprehensive, asset-
based approaches to education and youth development have tremendous
potential to contribution to the academic success of student from all
backgrounds. Having ascertained that students’ motivation is a potent factor that
exerts influence on academic performance, the question to ask then in whose
duty is it is motivate students?
Oniyama and Oniyama (2005) hold that student plays a major role in
motivating themselves for a better academic performance, but also other people
have their roles to play. The investigation also revealed that teachers, vice-
principals, and school organizations have great roles to play in the motivate
performance. The result by Oniyama and Oniyama (2005) it not surprising
because one-third of students’ daily lives are spent at school showed that
parents’ socio-economic status have great roles to play in motivation of student.
Parents of higher socio-economic status are more likely to take their children to
schools with better organization, good academic environment and more
qualified teachers who will motivate the student more. Students form such
schools stand the chance of better intellectual preparedness, high academic self-
efficacy, better academic performance (Christiana, 2008) and are less likely to
indulge in examination malpractices.
Summary of Literature Review.
This chapter reviews some of the relevant theories that were put forward
to explain in concept of corruption in human society. The theories reviewed are
observational learning theory (Bandura, 1986, 1988); the Needs Hierarchy
theory (Maslow, 1943, 1970), and the social structure theory (Merton, 1989).
Moreover, some of the empirical studies conducted to test the reality of these
theories were also reviewed.
On gender differences, while several studies reported that males are more
disposed to indulge in examination malpractice than females (e.g Label &
Levanon, 1988; Ward & Beck, 1989; Davis, Grover, Becker & McGregor,
1992; Lobel, 1993), other found that females are more involved in examination
malpractice than males (e.g Leming, 1980). Yet others found no statistically
significant difference between male and female students in cheating behaviour
(e.g Haines, Diekhoff, Labeff & Clark, 1986; Evans & Craig 1990).
On environmental influence, Adepoju (2002) found significant difference
in academic performance between urban and rural students. Similarly, Ojoawo
(1989) found significant difference in academic self confidence between rural
and urban students. Owoeye (2000) found good facilities as determinants of
academic poise and success, while Ofoegbu (1998) found the school home
distance as a potent factor in school success.
On socio-economic factors, Ryan and Deci (2000), Christiana’s (2008);
Afolabi and Imhonde (2003); Aluede and Omoregie (2005) found motivation
(determined by parental socio-economic status) as the major reason for a
student’s level of intelligence and academic performance.
However, it is the contention of this study that a joint study of socio-
economic status, gender and environment will produce a better result that may
bridge some of the gaps between demography and corruption.
Hypotheses
The following hypotheses were postulated, and therefore tested in this study.
1. There will be no statistically significant difference in perception of
examination malpractice between participants of high socio-economic
status and those of low socio-economic status.
2. There will be no statistically significant gender differences in perception
of examination malpractice.
3. There will be no statistically significant difference in perception of
examination malpractice between participants from schools in rural areas
and participants from schools in urban areas.
CHAPTER THREE:
METHODS.
Participants.
There hundred and forty-six (346) senior school I (SS1) student in
Nsukka Local Government Area participated in the study. Participants comprise
of male (193) and females (153) drawn from six (6) secondary schools in
Nsukka Local Government Area. This school includes: St Theresa’s College;
Nsukka High School; Iheaka Girls Secondary School, St. Cypril’s Girls
Secondary School, Ede-Oballa Community Secondary School and Opi High
School, Opi. Three of these schools are located in rural areas while the other
three are located in urban Areas. These six secondary schools were sample for
the study because schools located in Nsukka Local Government Area: the
secondary schools in the urban areas (St. Theresa’s College Nsukka, Nsukka
High School Nsukka and St. Cypril’s Girls Secondary School Nsukka),
represents the 7 Secondary Schools in Nsukka Urban while the 3 Secondary
Schools in Rural Area (Ede-oballa Community Secondary School, Opi High
School and Iheaka Girls Secondary School), represent the 8 Secondary Schools
in Nsukka rural Area. The participants were drawn by simple random sampling.
Hence, in each of the schools, the researcher rapped pieces of paper written “A”
and “B”. The SSI student were asked to pick. The first sixty (60) student (30
males & 30 Females) who picked “A” in each school were include in the study
sample.
Participants were met on the assembly ground before morning classes
began. They were told of the rationale behind the study as purely academic. The
confidentiality of their responses were assured. Each participant received a pen
as incentive for participation.
Instrument
The instrument for data collection is the “Examination Malpractice
Questionnaire (EMQ) developed by Alutu and Aluede (2006) and validated for
use in the study by the researcher. The examination malpractice Questionnaire
(EMQ) was originally a 24 item Questionnaire. According to Alutu and Aluede
(2006), it elicited responses on students’ personal perception and their opinion
on the perception of significant others about examination malpractices.
However, it lacks the qualities of a standard psychological assessment tool.
Thus, there are no empirical evidence of its validity, reliability and objective
scoring.
It is on the considerations of objectivity of measurement and scoring, that
the researcher, validated and standardized the instrument for use in this study.
First, the researcher conducted a pilot study to test the content and face validity
of the instrument using 3 lecturers in the Department of Psychology, University
of Nigeria, Nsukka. After face and content validation, no item was discarded
because over 70% of the judges agreed that the items measured malpractices.
However, all the items were modified by changing “cheating” to “examination
malpractice”. Item analysis of the instrument using 29 SS1 student of Model
Secondary School Nsukka reduced the items to 12 and yielded an alpha co-
efficient of .74 see Appendix B.
Procedure
The researcher, in the company of two (2) research assistants, visited six
Secondary School in Nsukka Local Government Areas. (Three (3) in the Urban
and three (3) in the rural Areas) to obtain approvals to conduct the study in the
schools prior to the study day. In addition to a letter of identification and
introduction from the Department of Psychology, University of Nigeria,
Nsukka, the researcher addressed the principals and staff of the various schools
on the Assembly ground on the day of the study. A permission to address the
SS1 students and obtain their consent were sought after from the principals of
these schools. The SS1 student were sampled on the assembly ground to ensure
uniformity in treatment.
After randomization, the sample was taken in an empty classroom for the
study. When they are settle, the questionnaire was distributed among them: each
participant was expected to respond only to one copy of the Questionnaire to
avoid double response. The researcher waited in each of the schools to collect
the filled Questionnaire, the same day. The whole exercise lasted for a period of
2 weeks.
Design/Statistic:
The design of the study is cross-sectional survey. The study involves
three (3) independent variables with two level each: socio-economic status
(High vs Low); Gender (male vs female); school location (urban vs rural) as
they influence one dependent variable; perception of examination malpractices.
Therefore, a 3-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed for data
analysis.
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS.
Table 1.
Table of means (X) and standard deviation (SD) of family socio-economic
status, gender and school location
FAMILY SOCIO-
ECONOMIC STATUS
GENDER SCHOOL
LOCATION
MEAN (X) SD N
High Male Urban
Rural
Total
35.8095
33.6531
34.6484
6.92552
7.59537
7.33390
42
49
91
Female Urban
Rural
Total
35.2000
31.9600
33.8500
7.76038
6.57951
7.41008
35
25
60
Low Male Urban
Rural
Total
32.8772
34.0667
33.4020
6.72434
6.80374
6.75199
57
45
102
Female Urban
Rural
Total
30.3590
32.1667
31.4086
5.61711
6.78163
6.35069
39
54
93
TOTAL SUMMARY
FAMILY SOCIO-
ECONOMIC STATUS
GENDER SCHOOL
LOCATION
MEAN (X) SD N
High
Low
________
________
________
________
34.3311
32.4513
7.35003
6.62247
151
195
Male
Female
_______
_______
33.9896
32.3660
7.04154
6.86692
193
153
Urban
Rural
33.4913
33.0520
7.02042
6.99607
173
173
High ______ Urban
Rural
35.5325
33.0811
7.27393
7.26741
77
74
Low ____ Urban
Rural
31.8542
33.0303
6.38910
6.82351
96
99
Table 2
3-way ANOVA summary of influence of family socio-economic status, gender
and environment on children’s disposition to corrupt practices.
SOURCE SS DF MS F SIG
Family Socio-
Economic
Status
260.11 1 260.11 5.49 *
Gender 229.62 1 229.62 4.84 *
School
Location
29.26 1 29.26 .62 NS
Family Socio-
Economic
Status
*Gender
22.75 1 22.75 .48 NS
Gender *
School
Location
1.10 1 1.10 .02 NS
Family socio-
Economic
Status
*School
Location
358.15 1 358.15 7.55 *
Family Socio-
economic
Status*Gender
*School
Location
14.72 1 14.72 .310 NS
Error 16027.55 338 47.42
Total 16912.46 345
Keys:
*. = Significant, P <.05
NS = not significant, P >.05.
The result of ANOVA presented in table 2 above shows a significant
main influence of family socio –economic status on perception of examination
Malpractices, F (1.338) = 4.84, p <.05. Therefore, hypothesis 1 is rejected thus,
as shown in table 1, participants of high family socio-economic status are more
likely to engage in examination malpractice (M = 34. 33, SD = 7.35) then their
counterpart of low family socio-economic status (M = 32.43, SD = 6.58). The
result also indicate significant main influence of gender on perception of
examination malpractice, F (1,338) = 4.84, p < .05. Therefore, hypothesis 2 is
rejected thus as shown in table 1, male participants are more likely to engage in
examination malpractice (M = 33.96, SD = 7.00) compared to their female
counterparts (M = 32 . 37, SD = 6.87).
The results indicate non-
significant main influences of school location on examination malpractice,
therefore, hypothesis 3 is accepted. There was also no significant interaction of
family socio-economic status and gender, non-significant interaction of gender
and school location, and non-significant interaction of family socio-economic
status, gender and school location on students perception of examination
malpractices. The result however, indicate significant interaction of family
socio-economic status and school location, F (1,338) = 7.5s, P <.05.
Examination Malpractice Scores
36.00
35.53
35.00
34.05
34.00
33.08
33.03
33.00
32.00
31.17
31.00
High Low
Family socio-economic status.
Keys:
Urban school
Rural school
Fig 1. Graph showing interaction of family socio-economic status and school
location on student perception of examination malpractices
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
The result of the present study show that there is a significant different
between participants of high family socio-economic status and those of low
family socio-economic status on perception of examination malpractices. Thus,
hypothesis one was rejected. And observation of table 1 show that the student
with high family scoio-economic status are more disposed than students with
low family socio-economic status to indulge in examination malpractices. This
is not consistent with the findings of Aluede and Omoregie (2005); Christiana
(2008) who found that parents of higher socio-economic status have great roles
to play in motivation of students. Parents of higher socio-economic status are
more likely to take their children to schools with better organization, good
academic environment and more qualified teacher who will motivate the
students more. Thus, students from such schools stand the chance of better
intellectual preparedness, high academic self-efficacy, better academic
performance, and are less likely to indulge in examination malpractices.
The result show that there is a significant gender differences on
perception of examination malpractices in secondary school. Thus, hypothesis
two was rejected. Observation of table 1 shows that males are more disposed.
This is consistent with the findings of Lobel and Levanon (1988); Ward and
Beck (1989) Davis, Grover, Becker and McGregor (1992); Lobel (1993) which
reported that males engage in examination malpractices more than fameles. But
these results are contrary to Leming (1980) which reported that females are
more disposed. However, Haines, Diekhoff, Labeff & Clark (1986); Evans and
Craig (1990) found no significant gender differences.
The significant gender different found in this study may be attributed to
the high demand placed on the male gender in the line of social upward
mobility. As a result they engage in all forms of short cuts to meet the social
expectation. Though most males seems to keep to the rules of examination,
however, those who should not have succeded , as desperate as they seem have
become, engage in examination malpractice in order to succeed.
The result of this study indicate non significant difference between
students in urban areas and students in rural areas. Thus, hypothesis three is
accepted. This result is not consisted with the findings of Adepoju (2002) which
reported a significant difference in the academic performance of students in
urban and rural secondary schools in Oyo State, Nigeria. Furthermore, Ojoawo
(1989) and Adepoju (2002) both found in their separate studies that location of
schools had significant effect on school academic performance and that there
was a significant difference in performance and academic self-confidence
between rural and urban schools. Owoeye (2000) in his study revealed that
school facilities were found to be the most potent determinant of academic
success in SSCE when taken together, whereas, Ofoegbu (1998) found that
school-home distance affects students academic performance and intellectual
superiority.
The non-significant difference found between the two localities in this
study may be attributed to the wide-spread of examination malpractice in recent
times. Thus, it does not matter where the school of the student’s houses are
located, improved communication network has made the world “global village”.
The result indicate non significant interactions of family socio-economic
status (FSES) and gender; gender and school location and family socio-
economic status, Environment and gender on students’ perception of
examination malpractice. However ,the result indicate significant interaction of
family socio-economic status and school location on examination malpractice.
Observation of the graph in Fig 1 clearly show that interaction occurred. And as
show in the Matrix in Appendix C, all participants in rural areas obtained
relatively equal scores on exam malpractice. But in the urban areas, while
participant high family soico-economic status obtained a higher mean score (M
= 35.53) those of low family socio-economic status obtained a lower mean
score (M = 31.17). This indicates that person of high socio-economic status who
live in the urban areas are more likely to engage in examination malpractices.
Limitations of the Study.
One problem encountered by the researcher concerns the willingness of
students to participate in the study. Getting more participants to join the study
was some what difficult. This was attributable to a number of factors which
include: ignorance of the real essence of researcher; imminence of school
examination which gave them no room for other activities due to limited time to
study.
Another problem encountered is finance, the researcher was not able to
organized a large group of participants that will include university students
across the country because of limited finance. However, the essence of the study
was well articulated.
Suggestion for Further Research.
Suggestions for further research are necessary for a number of reasons.
Consequently, these reasons are presented below.
For one things, the number of participants used in the present study is not
enough to make generalization to the entire population. It is necessary for future
researchers to include more participants comprising school students and
students of higher education. This will make for more valid result and
acceptable generalization.
Finally, future research to obtain samples from privately owned
institutions in order to make a comparise with government owned institutions
on the prevalence of examination malpractice. This will make for a better
appreciation of the trend among the high and the low family socio-economic
status.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION.
Having established the significance of family socio-economic status,
gender and locality on disposition to corrupt practices, it is worth while to
conclude this study by stating that examination malpractices seems to loom
larger in recent time, and sine high values have been attached to academic
success, higher price has also been attached to examination malpractice which
only the high can buy. This seems to have made it possible the “academic
Laziness” among the high family socio-economic status.
Likewise male student have become more prone because of differences in
gender expectations. Moreover, the significant interaction of family socio-
economic status and environment found in this study goes to demonstrate the
scourge of exam malpractice among the high in the urban centers.
To this end, this study has established the following conclusions:
1. Students of high family socio-economic status are more likely to be
involved in examination malpractices than students of low family socio-
economic status.
2. Secondary school boys are more interested in examinational malpractices
than their female counterparts.
3. People of high family socio-economic status who live in the urban areas
are more likely to be involved in corrupt practices.
REFERENCES.
Adeniran, F.C (2009). Activist Probes anatomy of corruption. Nigeria compass security ; March 13, pg. 48.
Adepoju, T.L (2002). Locational Factors of correlates of private cost and academic performance of secondary school students in Oyo State, Nigeria. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Adetunberu, J.O (1998). Adoption of continuous assessment as an alternative to examination to check examination malpractices in schools. In A. Olutoye and J.O. Adetunberu (Eds). Issues on examination malpractice in Nigeria. Edo-Ekiti PETOA Ado-Ekiti: Education publisher.
Adeyinka, A.A (1993). Examination Examined: the Nigeria secondary school system. Unpublished inaugural lecture, university of Ibadan, April, 29.
Afolabi, A.O. & Imhonde, H.O. (2003). Psychology: An Introduction (1st ed) Benin City; Ever-bless publication.
Afolabi, E.R.I (1998) CIPP Framework for the evaluation to distance education prograammes. Journal of Education Research and Evaluation, 2,93-100.
Alatas, H.S (1990). Corruption: Its nature, cause and functions. Kuala Lumpur: S Abdul Majeed & Co.
Aluede, O & Omoregie, E.O (2005). Basic text in education: Basic texts for foundation students (1st ed). Agbor, Nigeria: Central Books Ltd.
Aluko, M.A. O. (2005). Theoretical Approaches to the under standing of corruption in Nigeria. Ife social science review Journal of the faculty of social science 5 (2), 150-154.
Alutu, N.G.A. & Aluede, O. (2006). Secondary school student’s perception of examination malpractice and examination ethics. Journal of Human Ecology, 20 (4), 295-300.
Awanbor, D. (2005). Credentialing process in the Nigerian education system. Keynote address presented at the first annual conference of the faculty of education, Ambrose Ali University. Ekpoma, Nigeria. March.
Ayodele, S.O. (2000). Educational opportunities for Nigeria learners: how do we fare thus far? Address presented at the workshop organized by network for gender sensitive educational management in African (NEGSEMA) and the British connal, Akure, Nigeria February.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social functions of though and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1988). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed), Annals of Child development, (6). Greewich, C T:JA I Press.
Banks, O & Finlayson D. (1973). Success and failure in the secondary schools. Great Britain: Cox and Wyman Ltd.
Bosah, F.O (2007). Secondary schools: A study of Dishonest practices during Examinations. Unpublished M.Ed Thesis University of Nigeria Nsukka.
Broussar, S.C. & Garrison, M.E (2004). The relationship between classroom motivation and academic achievement in elementary school-aged children. Family consumer science research Journal, 33 (2), 106-120.
Camara, W.J.& Echternacht, G. (2000). The SAT 1 and high school grades: utility in predicting success. The college Board’s Research Notes. London: office of researcher and development.
Christiana, I.O (2008). Influence of motivation on students’ academic performance, The social science, 4 (1), 30-36.
Davis, S.F. Grover, C.A. Backer, A.H. & McGegro, N. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques and punishments teaching of psychology, Psychological Report 99 (1), 16-20.
Dollar, D. Fisman, S & Gatti R. (2001). Are women teal the fairer sex? Corruption and women in government policy. Research report on gender and development, working paper series No.4 http://www.worldbank.org/gender/prr/wp4pf
Drake, C.A (1914). Why students cheat. Psychology in the schools, 17, 151-522.
Evans, E.D. & Craig, D. (1990). Adolescent cognitions for academic cheating as a function of grade level and achievement status. Psychological reports, 77,691-698.
Fagbamiye, G. (1998). Examination malpractice in Nigeria educational institutions. Is there any hope? In A. Adegboye, O. Olutoye & J.O Adetunberu (Eds) Issues of Examination Malpractices in Nigeria Ado-Ekiti: PETOA Educational Publishers.
Fashola, B.T. (2008). Giving meaning to anti-corruption war. National life, December 20, pg 43
Federal Ministry of Education (2007). The challenge of examination irregularities. A paper presented at the Mandatory Integrity training initiative (MITI) for examiners, supervisors and invigilators at FGC Enugu. May 13.
Folayajo, W. & Makoju, G. (1997). Prototype for national assessment for Nigeria. FGN/UN, CEF/UNESCO Monitoring of learning Achievement quality Assurance in Education Assessment in Nigeria. 15th Annual Conference proceedings of the Association for Education Assessment in Africa. September 21-27.
Grabe, M & Lattaa, R.M. (1981). Cumulative achievement in a mastery instructional system: the impact of differences in resultant achievement motivation and persistence. American Educational research Journal, 18 (1), 7-13
Haines, V.J. Diekhoff, G.M, LaBaff, E.E. &Clark, R.E. (1986). College cheating: immaturity, lack of commitment and the neutralizing attitude. Research in higher education, 25,342-354.
Ikegunnam, C.I (1996). National Assessment of Educational progress in Nigeria. In G.A Badmus and P.I. Odor (Eds) Challenges of Managing Education Assessment. Reading on Education assessment: JAMB, NABTEB, NBEM, pp 17-27.
Leming, J.S (1980). Cheating behaviour. Subject variables and components of the internal- external scale under high and low risk. Conditions. Personality and individual Differences, 14 (1), 275-277.
Lobel, T.E. & Levanon, T. (1988). Self-esteem, need for approval and cheating behaviour, Ibid
Lobel, T.E.(1993). Gender differences in Adolescents’ cheating behaviour: an international Model Personality and individual differences, 14 (1), 275-277.
Marcal, L., & Roberts, W.W. (2000). Computer Literacy requirements and students performance in business communications. Journal of education for business 75 (5),253-257.
Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50,370-396.
Maslow, A.H. (1970). Motivational and personality (2nd ed.) New York: Harper & Row.
Merton, K. (1989). Social structure and Anomie. In D.H. Kelly (Ed) Deviant Behaviour: A text-Reader in sociology of Deviance (3rd Ed). New York: St. Martin’s.
Nunnally, J.C. (1972). Educational measurement and evaluation. (2nd edition). New York: McGraw Hill.
Nwana, O.C. (1982). Educational Measurement for teachers. Enugu: Nelson Africa.
Ofoegbu, F.I (1998). A case study of student inter-school movement and its impact on classroom management and students’ academic performance. African Journal of educational management, 6 (1), 156-164.
Ojerinder, D. (2000). Secondary Education sustainable nation integration and development in Nigeria. Keynote Address presented at the fourth National conference of research on Schooling. A.C.E. Ondo. 25-29 September.
Ojoawo, A. O (1989). Effects of differential distribution of resources on schools performances in WASC examinations in Oyo state secondary school (1984-1987). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, university of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Okoye, B.A. (2008). Examination frauds, 77 years old in Nigeria. The Guardian, May3; 12.
Okpala, P.M. Onocha G.O & Oyedeji, O.A. (1993). Measurement and evaluation in education. Ibadan: stiring –Horden Publishers.
Oluwatayo, J.A. (2004). Test administration and evaluation in Nigeria nursery and primary schools. A paper delivered at one-day seminar workshop for proprietors and teachers in private nursery primary schools in Ado-Ekiti. February.
Oluyeba, W. (1998). Why some candidates’ Examination Results are cancelled by WAEC. Seminar paper delivered at Ondo College of Education, Ikere- Ekiti.
Oniyama, H.O & Oniyama, E.E. (2005). Introduction to sociology of education: a social psychological analysis (2nd ed). Lagos Nigeria: Toni-Jode press.
Owoeye, J.S (2000). The effect of interaction of location, Facilities and class size on academic achievement of secondary school students in Ekiti State
Nigeria. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, university of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Ryan, R.M, & Deci, L.E (2000). Self-Concept Determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being American Psychologist, 55 (1), 68-78.
Sandra, D. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest and academic engagement. Journal of education research, 95 (6), 323-332.
Scales, P.C. & Roehlkepartain, E.C. (2003). Boosting student’s achievement: New researcher on the power of development assets. Search institute insights Evidence, 1 (1), 1-10.
Skaalvik, E.M & Skaalvik, S. (2006). Self-concept and self-efficacy in mathematics: relation with mathematics and achievement. Proceedings of the international conference on learning sciences. Bloomington, Indiana. http://www.findarticles.com.
Swampy, A. Knack, S. Lee Y. & Azfer O. (2001). Gender and corruption. Journal of Development Economics, 64,25-55.
Tyler, R. (1971). Basic principles of curriculum instructions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Ude, C.U (2007). Examination Leakages: Causes and Remedies. The Shepherd Newpaper July 29:13.
Uguroglu, M.E. & Walbery, H.J. (1979). Motivation and achievement: A quantitative synthesis. American Educational research and Journal, 16 (4), 375-389.
APPENDIX A.
Sample of exam malpractice questionnaire.
Pleas fill in the gaps as they apply to you.
SECTION A: Personal information.
Gender: Male Female
Name of school : _________________________________________________
Class: ___________________________________________________________
age: ____________________________________________________________
Resident: rural Area Urban Area.
SECTION B: Socio-Economic Status
What type apartment is your parents or Guardian living inn?
One Room Two Rooms Bungalow Flat
Is you parents or Guardian the owner of the apartment?
Yes No
Rate your family standard of living in relation to the overall living standard in
the country.
Below Average Average Above Average
SECTION C:
Below are series of statement. Tick (√) in the appropriate boxes as it
honestly applies to you. It is not an exam, so there are no right or wrong
answers. Your response will be handled in great confidence.
SA = Strongly Agree
A = Agree
D = Disagree
S D = Strongly Disagree
S/N ITEMS SA A D SD
1 I am interested in examination malpractice if it
is a difficult examination.
2 I engage examination malpractice due to lack
of confidence in myself
3 I will not feel guilty to engage examination
malpractice if the teacher fails to teach well.
4 No matter how hard you read, if you do not
engage in examination malpractice, you will fail
5 Examination malpractice is encouraging since
people who cheat often escape punishment.
6 I will engage in examination malpractice if my
parents give their support
7 Examination malpractice pay in competitive
examination in order to please parents and
friends
8 You cannot pass examination these days in
Nigeria without a little examination
malpractices.
9 The Nigerian society encourages examination
malpractice in schools.
10 It is difficult to stop examination malpractice in
our schools
11 Examination malpractice is the only way out if
much work done over a long period of time will
be examination once.
12 Examination malpractice is helpful for people
who are very nervous about examination.
APPENDIX D:
Family socio-economic status/ school location (Mean) Matrix
School location
School location Urban Rural Total
Family socio-
economic status
High 35.53 33.08 68.61
Low 31.17 33.03 64.20
Total 66.70 66.11