STAKEHOLDERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE STRATEGIES ADOPTED FOR CURBING EXAMINATION MALPRACTICE

IN PUBLIC EXAMINATIONS IN NIGERIA.

BY

UCHEKWE JOY OLUCHUKWU

P.G/MED/09/50680

AUGUST 2012.

Title Page

STAKEHOLDERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE STRATEGIES ADOPTED FOR CURBING EXAMINATION MALPRACTICE

IN PUBLIC EXAMINATIONS IN NIGERIA.

BY

UCHEKWE JOY OLUCHUKWU

P.G/MED/09/50680

A PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF MASTER DEGREE IN

MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE EDUCATION,

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA.

AUGUST 2012.

APPROVAL PAGE

THE THESIS HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF

SCIENCE EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA.

BY

------------------------------------ -------------------------------------

PROF. B.G NWORGU PROF. C.R NWAGBO

SUPERVISOR HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

--------------------------- ----------------------------------

EXTERNAL EXAMINAL INTERNAL EXAMINAL

----------------------------------

PROF. S.A EZEUDU

DEAN, FACULTY OF EDUCATION.

CERTIFICATION

UCHEKWE JOY OLUCHUKWU, a post graduate student in the Department of

Science Education and with the registration number PG/MED/09/50680 has

satisfactorily completed the requirement for the research work for the degree of

Master in Science Education (Measurement and Evaluation). The work embodied in

the project is original and has not been submitted in part or full for any diploma or

degree of this or any other university.

--------------------------------- ---------------------------------

UCHEKWE J.O PROF. B.G NWORGU

Candidate. Supervisor.

DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to my beloved mother, Late Mrs. Anna Uchekwe.

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS

The researcher is most grateful to her supervisor, Prof. B.G Nworgu for his

tolerance, criticisms, guidance, and suggestions at every stage of this study.

She also wants to thank all the lecturers in the Department of Science

Education for helping in one way or the other for making her dream a reality. Her

special thanks go to Prof. A. Ali, Dr. B.C Madu, Dr. O.A Ovute, and Dr. J. J

Ezeugwu for assisting in validating the research instrument. She is also grateful to

Dr. K.O Usman, Mr. J.J Agah, Phidelia R. Waziri, Mrs. M.C Ofoha, and Mr.

Anthony Ugwoke for their useful suggestions which contributed immensely to the

quality of this work.

The reseacher is highly indebted to her pastor, David Labi. This work wouldn’t

have been possible without him. He brought the ideal and also made available the

resources. May God bless him richly. Finally, my special thanks go to my beloved

family for their prayers and support and all the respondents who partook in this study.

To Him who is able to do exceedingly, above all we can ask or think, the all-

knowing God, she says to Him be all the glory. Nothing would have happened, if not

for His grace, mercy, and favour.

Uchekwe, J.O

University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Background to the Study -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1

Statement of the Problem -------------------------------------------------------------------- 7

Purpose of the Study ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9

Significance of the Study ------------------------------------------------------------------- 9

Scope of the Study -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12

Research Questions ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12

Hypotheses ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Conceptual Framework --------------------------------------------------------------------- 16

Factors Responsible for Examination Malpractice-------------------------------------- 19

Forms of Examination Malpractice ------------------------------------------------------- 22

Agents of Examination Malpractice ------------------------------------------------------- 29

Reasons for Persistence of Examination Malpractice --------------------------------- 32

Effect of Examination Malpractice ------------------------------------------------------- 36

Strategies for Curbing Examination Malpractice --------------------------------------- 38

Theoretical Framework --------------------------------------------------------------------- 43

Related Empirical Studies ------------------------------------------------------------------ 47

Summary of Literature Review------------------------------------------------------------- 51

CHAPTER THREE: RESEACH METHODS

Design of the Study ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 52

Area of the Study ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 52

Population of the Study -------------------------------------------------------------------- 53

Sample and Sampling Techniques -------------------------------------------------------- 53

Instrument for Data Collection ------------------------------------------------------------ 54

Validation of the Instrument --------------------------------------------------------------- 55

Reliability of the Instrument --------------------------------------------------------------- 57

Method of Data Collection ----------------------------------------------------------------- 57

Method of Data Analysis -------------------------------------------------------------------- 57

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS

Research Question One--------------------------------------------------------------------- 58

Research Question Two -------------------------------------------------------------------- 60

Research Question Three------------------------------------------------------------------ 64

Research Question Four--------------------------------------------------------------------- 66

Hypothesis one ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 70

Hypothesis Two------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 71

Hypothesis three ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 72

Hypothesis Four ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 72

Hypothesis Five ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 74

Hypothesis Six ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 74

Major Findings------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 77

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUMMARY.

Discussion of Results ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 80

Conclusions ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 87

Educational Implications ------------------------------------------------------------------- 89

Limitations of the Study -------------------------------------------------------------------- 90

Suggestions for Further Studies ------------------------------------------------------------- 91

Recommendations --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 91

References ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 92

Appendices

Appendix I: Population of Senior Secondary Schools, Principals, Teachers

and Students 99

Appendix II: Distribution of Sampled Schools ----------------------------------------- 100

Appendix III: Sample of Teachers and Students ---------------------------------------- 102

Appendix IV: Interview Schedule ---------------------------------------------------------- 103

Appendix V: Face Validation of Research Instrument -------------------------------- 106

Appendix VI: Second Version of the Instrument --------------------------------------- 109

Appendix VII: Factor Analysis of the Instrument --------------------------------------- 115

Appendix VIII: Rotated Component Matrix---------------------------------------------- 119

Appendix IX: Survived Factors after Factor Analysis --------------------------------- 123

Appendix X: Final Version of the Instrument ------------------------------------------- 127

Appendix XI: Reliability of the Instrument ---------------------------------------------- 130

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGES

1 Mean perception ratings of education sector stakeholders with

respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing

pre-examination malpractice - - - - - - - 58

2 Response to interview and focus group discussion on the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice- - - 60

3 Mean ratings of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the Strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice- - 61

4 Response to interview and focus group discussion on the effectives of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice- - 63

5 Mean ratings of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice - - 64

6 Responses to interview and focus group discussion on the effectives of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice - - 66

7a Mean ratings by gender of education sector stakeholders of the effectiveness

of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice- - 67

7b Mean ratings according to gender on the effectiveness of the strategies

adopted for curbing during examination malpractice - - - - 68

7c Mean ratings by gender of education sector stakeholders with respect to the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination

malpractice - - - - - - - - - 69

8 One-way ANOVA of education sector stakeholders mean ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing - - pre-examination malpractice - - - - - - - 70

9 T- test of male and female education sector stakeholders mean ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre- examination malpractice- - - - - - - - 71

10a One- way ANOVA of education sector stakeholders mean ratings with

respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during

examination malpractice - - - - - - - 71

10b Post Hoc Multiple Comparison using Scheffe Method - - - 72

11 T- test of male and female education sector stakeholders mean ratings with

respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice - - - - - - - - 73

12a One- way ANOVA of education sector stakeholders mean ratings with

respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing

post- examination malpractice - - - - - - 75

12b Post Hoc Multiple Comparison using Scheffe Method - - - 75

13 T- test of male and female education sector stakeholders mean ratings with

respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-

examination malpractice - - - - - - - - 75

ABSTRACT

The problem of examination malpractice in public examinations have continued to militate against efforts at ensuring high standard of education in Nigeria, despite the strategies adopted to curb it by various examination bodies,and federal, state , and local governments. In this study an attempt was made to determine the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice in Nigeria, as perceived by various education sector stakeholders. Four research questions were posed, and six hypotheses were tested as a guide to the study. The design for the study was survey. The population of the study comprised four categories of education sector stakeholders (parents, teachers, principals, and students) drawn from the 342 senior secondary schools in Delta state. The sample for the study was 1000 education sector stakeholders, using multi-stage sampling techniques to draw the sample size. A 4-point rating scale questionnaire tagged “Stakeholders Perceptions of the Effectiveness of the Strategies for Curbing Examination Malpractice Questionnaire (SPESCEMQ)”, was developed by the researcher; validated, and subjected to factor analysis to ensure the construct validity of the instrument. To complement the findings from the use of questionnaire, in-depth interview was conducted with 25 selected public examination officials (WAEC and NECO), and a focus group discussion with 100 students from the selected sampled schools. Mean, t-test, and one- way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were used for data analysis. The results of the study revealed that the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice in public examinations in Nigeria were considered ineffective. Further findings from the interview and focus group discussion also revealed that the strategies are not effective. The educational implications and other findings are discussed in this study. Recommendations among others are: the government should enforce the adopted strategies for curbing examination malpractice Act 1999 to ensure that culprits are punished as spelt out in the Act, teachers’ welfare should be improved so that they will teach conscientiously and produce more dedicated students.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background to the Study

Examination is a major instrument used for the evaluation of learners’ achievement. Alutu

& Aluedu (2006), defined examination as a formal test of somebody’s knowledge or ability in a

particular subject, especially by means of answering questions or practical exercise in other to

measure how much knowledge a student in an institution of learning has acquired after exposing

such a student to a definite course of instruction. The authors also explained that examination on a

broad perspective is an instrument for testing, assessing, evaluating and accreditation, of which the

outcome of such judgment is used for diagnosing, placement, guidance, certification among others.

Examination can be internal or external. According to Oredein (2004), public examinations,

also known as external examinations are conducted on behalf of the state and open to all those who

meet defined entry criteria within the society. They are administered by external bodies (evaluation

agencies) and include examinations used to select those wishing to enter government service, state

schools, and other educational institutions. Such examination bodies include West African Council

(WAEC), National Examination Council (NECO), Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board

(JAMB), National Business and Technical Education Board (NABTEB) and so on. The rationale

for adopting public examinations is in the realization of the fact that public examinations provide

adequate basis for qualifying students’ abilities, and also the exertion of control over the attainment

of the curricula across schools. However, public examinations are different from school

examination , which are more or less internal or school- based , in which case the teachers are

directly involved in the assessment of their students. Examples of schools examinations include

continuous assessment , terminal and promotion examinations e.t.c.

In Nigeria, ministries of education, examination bodies, parents, school principals,

classroom teachers, and even learners base their judgments concerning the quality of educational

outcomes most of the time on performance at public examinations (Oredein, 2004). Public

examination therefore seems to be the most popular parameter by which society judges the product

of its educational system. This is because performances in public examinations are now used as a

prerequisite for admission into other levels of schooling, job placement, awards of certificate and

diploma. According to Joshua (2008), one can therefore use examination to categorize students into

high and low abilities. Those with high abilities are giving preference above those with low

abilities, which of course the low abilities would also desire. As such, in a bid to demonstrate high

abilities, they go into all kinds of vices, and one of such vices is examination malpractice.

The Examination Malpractice Act (1999) defined examination malpractice as any act of

omission or commission by a person who in anticipation of, before, during or after any examination

fraudulently secure any unfair advantage for himself or any other person in such a manner that

contravenes the rules and regulations to the extent of undermining the validity, reliability,

authenticity of the examination and ultimately the integrity of the certificate issued. Oluyeba and

Daramola (cited in Alutu & Aluedu, 2006) remarked that examination malpractice is any irregular

behavior exhibited by a candidate or anybody charged with the conduct of examination before ,

during, or after the examination that contravenes the rules and regulations governing the conduct of

such examination.

Examination malpractice is caused by a number of identifiable factors. In the opinion of

Maduabum and Maduabum (1998) and Onyechere (1996), the factors that cause examination

malpractice include:

• Students’ lack of appropriate preparation for examination.

• Desire to pass at all costs.

• Non-completion of syllabuses.

• Laxity in prosecuting offenders.

• Incessant strike action in educational institutions in Nigeria.

• Inadequate funding of schools.

• Lack of effective teaching and learning, among others.

Also, Onyechere (2004) divides the forms of malpractices observable in public

examinations into three: pre- examination, during examination and post- examination malpractice.

In the pre- examination category, examination questions are procured before the date of the

examination. Malpractice during examination include impersonation, cheating while examination is

in progress, giraffe, forgery of results slips, making use of unauthorized materials in examination

halls, and external assistance by individuals (invigilators, supervisors, teachers and hired persons).

Post- examination malpractices on the other hand, are those traceable to the staff of public

examination boards. Common forms at this stage include:- Re-packaging of scripts to include those

written outside examination hall in collaboration with invigilators/supervisors, payment of money

to examiners/markers for some favours, including re-writing the examination, corrupt practices of

computer operators in examination bodies who obtain money from candidates to change

grades/scores, general “sorting”, particularly with officials of examination bodies and examiners to

post grades that they never earned or merited. (Joshua, 2008; Ojerinde, in Obo, 2008).

Examination malpractice in Nigeria, has continued to assume different forms of practices.

According to Onyechere (1996), it could assume any of the following forms: sale of examination

question papers, smuggling of relevant text materials into examination halls, impersonation,

disorderliness in examination halls, forgery of result slips, giraffe and others. To make the matter

worse, it is believed that not only students are involved in this act. Parents, teachers, school heads,

examination officials, all collude with students to perpetrate this misconduct and the collusion

between one or more of these agents makes it more difficult to combat (Ijaiya, 2004). Adding to

this, Samuel (2003) observed that the first recorded incident of examination malpractice in Nigeria

was the leakage of the Cambridge School Certificate Examination in 1914. The situation remained

relatively unchanged until 1963 when there was leakage of two public examination papers. Since

1963, examination malpractice became more pervasive and assumed more serious dimension that it

is now done in the open.

Examination malpractice has been perceived by various education sectors stakeholders who

include teachers, students, parents, principals among others. According to Onyechere (2008),

students get involved not because they do not prepare well or afraid of failure, but simply because

they seem odd in a system where everyone is a potential cheater. Also Adebayo (2002) in his study

found out that student cheat because they believe that everybody does it, and they also see it as a

means of helping others. Similarly, Oluwatelure (2008) in studying how selected members of

university community perceived academic integrity and examination issues, found out that the

youth in the community did not see anything wrong with “giraffing”, impersonation, and going into

examination hall with illegal materials. As such, the youth even make a living from writing

examinations for others.

Still on perception, Oluwatelure (2004) discovered that teachers perceived examination

malpractice (particularly in selling examination materials) as a means of poverty alleviation. To

Oluwatelure, it could be as a result of inadequate compensation system in the nation. However,

evidence abound that various examination malpractices in public examinations have their sources

from either the custodians of the examination papers, printers of question papers, examination

bodies involved in examination process or delay in starting an examination, and the police, who are

meant to be the watch dog of society, after receiving their own settlements (bribe), turn out to be the

agents of this crime (Onyechere, 2004).

According to Oredein (2004), gender largely influences the behavior of individual towards

cheating, especially during examination. Gender, according to Moser (1993) refers to the array of

socially constructed roles and relationships, personality traits, attitudes, behaviors, values, relative

power and influence that society ascribes to the two sexes on a differential basis. It is also defined

as the economic, political, and cultural attributes and opportunities associated with being male or

female. Gender is an acquired identity that is learned, changes over time, and varies widely within

and across cultures. Gender is relational and refers not simply to women or men but to the

relationship between them.

Different views exist as to which gender involves more in examination malpractice. Lobel

and Levanon (1998) argued that more male engage in examination malpractice than females, while

Leming (1990) believes that there are more female involvement in examination malpractice than the

male. Some scholars have argued that this variable (gender) correlates to certain degree and cannot

be separated from examination malpractice, as such, they attached gender of the learners as factors

for examination malpractice. For instance, in tracing the mode of examination malpractice between

the sexes, Oredein (2004) argued empirically that girls find it easy to inscribe information on any

part of their body like thighs, purses and palms than their male counterparts. In contrary to the

above studies, Olatoye (2006) revealed that examination malpractice is not a function of gender,

rather, it is a general phenomenon among male and female students.

Indeed, examination malpractice has become endemic in Nigeria’s educational system. It

takes place at all levels of Nigeria’s educational systems; and its forms are almost without end. For

instance, according to the West African Examination Councils (WAEC) Chief Examiner Reports in

2006, in Nigeria, between May/June 1996 and May/June 2005, a total of 1,367,726 of students

representing 9.4% over that period were involved in examination malpractice. This large figure

shows how presently the menace of examination malpractice has eaten into the very fabric of the

educational system.

However, different approaches have been adopted by different examination bodies, federal,

state and local government to curb examination malpractice before the examination, during the

examination, and after the examination. Some of these efforts include, checking of passports to

ensure that they correspond with the candidate sitting for the examination, sitting arrangement (pre-

examination strategies); prohibiting the use of electronic devices, such as GSM, pagers,

unannounced visits to examination centres by officers of examination bodies (during the

examination strategies), answers written on papers other than one provided for discountenanced,

cancellation of results for mass cheating (post-examination strategies). (Bunza, 1997).

The West African Examination Council (WAEC), as well as National Examination Council

(NECO), in a bid to forestall examination malpractice has separately embarked on public campaign,

drawing attention to the harmful effects of examination malpractice and the punishment attached to

each offence, using handbills, posters, and jingles, seminars and workshops. The Federal

Government of Nigeria in a bid to curb examination malpractice promulgated Decree 20, 1984 to

deal with it. Part of the decree stipulated 21 years imprisonment on conviction to any infringement

of examination malpractice. However, examination malpractice Act 33 of 1999, revised the above

Decree, but stipulated punishment ranging from a fine of fifty thousand naira (N50,000) to hundred

thousand naira (N100,000), and imprisonment for a term of three to four years , with or without

option of fine. This new development is due to the inability of the appropriate authorities to enforce

the old Decree 20 of 1984 (Fagbemi, 1998). Yet, the continuous engagement in examination

malpractice especially in WAEC, NECO and JAMB, continue to defy solution despite the efforts

made so far.

It would appear that the incident of examination malpractice has proven to be an incurable

disease in Nigeria educational system, making some examination to lose credibility and expose the

entire educational system to ridicule, to the extent that many students cannot defend their

certificates and cannot also perform on employment. There is therefore the need to find out the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice in public examinations

in Nigeria, hence this study.

Statement of the Problem

Examination malpractice is not a recent phenomenon. It is however, getting worse in

Nigeria with time and civilization (World Bank, 2001). Students get involved not only because they

do not prepare well, or are afraid of failure, but sometimes because they seem odd, as fellow

students tease others who do not partake in this crime as pretenders or “Mr. too know” or cowards.

Youths in the community even make a living from it, by collecting money from students to assist

them during an examination. Teachers, supervisors and invigilators perceive examination

malpractice as a means of poverty alleviation.

The negative effect of examination malpractice affects the students as well as the society at

large. Most employers of labour have complained in different fields of endeavour about our

graduates who failed to perform despite the outstanding certificates they possessed (Ahmed, 1996).

The introduction of post- JAMB screening in various universities is also as a result of the high rate

of examination malpractice in West African Examination Council (WAEC), National Examination

Council (NECO), and Joint Admission Matriculation Board (JAMB). Universities lost faith in the

results presented by students seeking admission into tertiary institutions. To make matters worse,

the credibility of Nigerian certificates has now been subjected to extensive scrutiny in some foreign

countries as a result of examination malpractice (Jimoh, 2009).

Various examination bodies are known to have equally adopted a number of measures as a

check to examination malpractice. One of such measures is the cancellation of candidates’ result,

and withholding of results. The Federal Government in a bid to curb this menace promulgated Act.

33 of 1999, which stipulated a fine that ranged from N50,000 to N100,000 or imprisonment for a

term of up to 3 years or more. However, the problem of examination malpractice has continued

unabated. Could it be that the various strategies being adopted to curb examination malpractice in

public examinations in Nigeria are ineffective? The problem of the study therefore is: what are the

perceptions of the education sector stakeholders of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in

curbing examination malpractice in public examinations in Nigeria?

Purpose of the Study

The major purpose of the study is to determine stakeholders’ perceptions of the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing examination malpractice in public

examinations in Nigeria.

Specifically, this study will ascertain the:

(i) Perception of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies

adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractices.

(ii) Perception of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the

strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice during examinations.

(iii) Perception of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the

strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractices.

(iv) The influence of gender on the perceptions of education sector stakeholders with respect to

the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice in public

examinations.

Significance of the Study

The study would be significant both theoretically and practically. Theoretically,

attribution theory held the view that people perceived, explain things and answer questions based

on internal attribution, or external attribution, or both attributions. In light of this, a justification was

made to determine how do education sectors stakeholders perceive the effectiveness of the

strategies adopted to curb examination malpractice in public examination. The other theory, that is

classical test theory, also deals with other components like validity and reliability of an instrument

apart from the assessment of cognitive domain. However the focus here was on construct validity

which is concerned with the extent to which a research instrument measures a particular

psychological (social) construct, and establishing this type of validity may involve a statistical

procedure known as factor analysis. Base on this, a justification was made to carry out factor

analysis on the instrument developed to elicit information from the respondents, so as to ensure the

construct validity of the instrument and therefore yield the desired result.

From the practical perspective, the findings of this study would be significant to

examination bodies, the government, students, the society, and other researchers. Various

examination bodies in Nigeria have put up efforts at curbing examination malpractice; meanwhile,

it seems that candidates and other agents of examination malpractice are not relenting in frustrating

and voiding all efforts by these bodies. This is because examination malpractice is still on the

increased. Various questions have been raised by concerned individuals in the society, such as:

does it mean that the strategies are ineffective, or the bodies need to intensify on the

implementation of these strategies, or could it be that there is need to change the strategies since

examination malpractice is still on the increase? The findings from this study will enable the

examination bodies have a clear picture on what is at-stake so as to revisit their strategies and take

decisions on whether to intensify or adopt new strategies, to ensure that examination malpractice is

curbed.

The findings of this study would also benefit the government. The quality of a nation’s

manpower development is in direct proportion to the quality of educational system. Examination

malpractice is gradually rendering our certificate useless; reduce man-power development in our

country, as majority of quacks or loafers have been graduating from higher institutions. This of

course has also affected our economy, political and social lives of the citizen. Despite the effort

made to promulgate Act 1999 to address this social vice, examination malpractice is still on the

increased. Some stakeholders argued that the Act is not adequate to curb examination malpractice,

while others argued that the problem is not the Act, but adequate implementation of the Act.

Findings from this study will serve as an eye opener to the government to revisit the Act in other to

take drastic steps to end examination malpractice.

Students would also indirectly benefit from the study. Many good students have been

denied admission into tertiary institutions by those corrupt ones, who through examination

malpractice have better scores. This of course has lured some of these good students into this social

vice, especially as they see other students who are involved in that act go scot- free and this render

their certificate useless, as they hardly defend it. As the findings from this study will help

examination bodies, the government to take the necessary actions to curb examination malpractice,

this will in turn re-orientate the students towards hard work, especially when they realized that there

is no substitute for hard work in academic and thereby authenticates the certificates they present.

The society would benefit from this study in the sense that, when there are effective and

adequate graduates, equipped with knowledge and skill; it will be used to contribute meaningfully

to the development of the society.

Finally, this study would also be significant to other researchers, as it will serve as a

reference point for other related studies.

Scope of the Study

This study was limited to four education sector stakeholders viz: principals, parents,

teachers and students. It was also limited to the perception of education sector stakeholders with

respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing pre- examination malpractice,

during the examination malpractice, and post- examination malpractice, and the influence of

gender on the perceptions of the education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of

the strategies adopted in curbing examination malpractice in public examinations.

Research Questions

The following research questions are posed to serve as a guide to the study:

(1) What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders with respect

to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre- examination malpractice?

(2) What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders with respect

to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice during

examinations?

(3) What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders with respect

to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post examination malpractice?

(4) How does the gender of the education sector stakeholders influence their mean perception

ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination

malpractice before, during, and after public examinations?

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses would guide the study and would be tested at 0.05 level of

significance.

Ho1: There would be no significant difference in the mean ratings of education sector

stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-

examination malpractice.

H02: The mean rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would not differ

significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-

examination malpractice.

H03: There would be no significant difference in the mean ratings of education sector

stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing malpractice

during examination.

H04: The mean rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would not differ

significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing

examination malpractice during examination.

H05: There would be no significant difference in the mean of education sector stakeholders with

respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination

malpractice.

H06: The mean rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would not differ

significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-

examination malpractice.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The review of related literature for the study is organized along the following sub-headings:

Conceptual Frame Work

- The concept and purpose of examination.

- Meaning of examination malpractice.

- Factors responsible for Examination malpractice

- Forms of Examination malpractice.

- Agents of Examination malpractice

- Reasons for persistence of examination malpractice

- Effect of Examination malpractice

- Strategies for curbing Examination malpractice.

Theoretical Frame Work

- Classical test theory

- Attribution theory

Review of Related Empirical Studies

- Gender and examination malpractice

- Education sector stakeholders and examination malpractice

Summary of Literature Review.

Conceptual Frame Work

Concept and Purpose of Examination

One of the objectives of education in Nigeria is to prepare the young ones to face future

challenges and develop them to meet the nation’s manpower requirements. Hence, the values and

functionality of any education system lie in its ability to actualize the goals of education. In

educational systems world over, the examination processes are different. The goals of national

educational system and indeed national development become like mirage if examination ethics is

not encouraged and instituted (Uwadiae, 2005). Examination is a process of evaluating the extent to

which education has taken place in an individual. Maduka (1993) defined examination as a way to

ascertain how much of a subject matter in a particular field of study the candidate has mastered.

Balogun (1999) also defined it as the process through which students are evaluated or tested to find

out the quality of knowledge they have acquired within a specified period.

Okwu (2006) stated that examination is a process commonly used by teachers to find out

how much of what they taught has been learnt, to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching methods for

decision making. In this way, the teacher uses examination as a tool for promoting effective

learning. However, examination serves a more serious purpose when the results are used for making

vital decision. The consequence of which has a far-reaching impact on the examinee. For Eze

(2002) test and examination are the mile post along the road of learning and are supposed to tell the

teacher and the students the degree to which both have been successful in their achievement of the

course objectives. This is a clear indictor that examination serves the purpose of testing the ability

of the teachers and students in imparting and absorbing knowledge respectively. The outcome of

examination is used for diagnosing, placement, predict future performance, and license candidates

for occupation or profession e.t.c. obviously, examinations, are vital for assessing the effectiveness

of teaching and learning in the educational system.

Examination could be internal or external. It could be oral, written or both. It is internal

when it is carried out by the school teacher. Examples of internal examinations are: continuous

assessment test, terminal semester and annual or promotion examinations. External examination

other wise called public examinations are examinations conducted by examination bodies (external

bodies) or council as the case may be. Examples of external (public) examinations common in

Nigeria are: common entrance examination for admission into secondary schools, school certificate

examination conducted by West Africa Examination Council (WAEC) and National Examination

Council (NECO). The Joint Admission Matriculation Board (JAMB) and National Teacher Institute

(NTI), conduct admission tests into tertiary institutes. National Business and Technical

Examination Board (NABTEB) conducts professional examinations for teachers and technicians

respectively. Every examination is expected to be guided by a code of conduct or ethics of the

institution, government or the examination bodies. Hence, any action that undermines the code,

poses a great threat to the validity and reliability of examination results and certification.

Examination Malpractice

The Examination Malpractice Act (FRN, 1999) explains examination malpractice as any act

of omission or commission by a person who in anticipation of before, during or after any

examination fraudulently secure any unfair advantage for himself/herself or any other person in

such a manner that contravenes the rules and regulations to the extent of undermining the validity,

reliability, authecity of the examination and ultimate the integrity of the certificates issued. Olugeba

and Daramola cited in Aluto & Aluedu (2006) remarked that examination malpractice is any

irregular behaviour exhibited by candidate or anybody charged with the conduct of examination

before, during, or after the examination that contravenes the rules and regulations governing the

conduct of such examination. Makoju, Adewale, Nwangwu and Shuaibu (2004) stated that

whenever rules and regulations governing the conduct of any examination are not adhered to by the

parties involves in public examination; it is taken that examination malpractice has occurred. On the

other hand WAEC (2003) defined examination malpractice as any irregular behaviour exhibited by

candidates or anybody charged with the responsibility of conducting examination in or outside the

examination hall, before, during or after such examination. Odongbo (2002) observed that

examination malpractice refers to an act of wrong doing carried out by a candidate or group of

candidates or other persons with the intention to cheat and gain unfair advantage in an examination.

A synthesized definition of examination malpractice from numerous definitions in the literature

given by Joshua (2008a), is that examination malpractice is any unauthorized or unapproved action,

inaction activity, behaviour or practice that is associated with the preparation, conduct, and

processing of examination and other forms of assessment carried out by any person included in the

preparing for giving, taking and processing that examination at any level. The author added that

examination malpractice is any form of deviation from the stated norms/ethics of examination

before, during or after any examination that result in making the student achieving more than what

his independent ability can achieve.

The concept of examination malpractice is not a new phenomenon in Nigeria. The first

known examination malpractices in Nigeria occurred in 1914, during the years of senior Cambridge

local examination syndicate, before the establishment of the West African Examination council

(WAEC). Subsequently followed by the 1963 to 1990. However, until the popular Expo “77”,

examination malpractices existed at low ebb and in simple and unsophisticated forms, but became

more pervasive from 1977 till date. (Samuel, 2003).

Factors Responsible for Examination Malpractice

There is an array of literature on the factors responsible for examination malpractice in

Nigeria Maduabum, and Maduabum (1998) and Onyechere (1996) identified the factors of

examination malpractice to include: students’ lack of preparation for examination, desire to pass at

all cost, non-completion of syllabuses ,laxity in prosecuting offenders, incessant staff strikes action

that often interrupt the school programmes, inadequate funding of schools, lack of effective

teaching and learning among others. Oladuni (1995), and Adegboye (1998), identified such factors

as: quest for material wealth, injustice in the punishment of culprit/insincerity in tackling the

problem, poor logistics for examinations, the desire to satisfy parents’ ambition, undue emphasis on

examination results and certificates, moral decadence, lack of students self confidence, benefits

derived by vendors of examination papers, corrupt examination officials and supervisors among

others.

According to Fayombo (2004), factor responsible for examination malpractices could be,

sociological or psychological. Sociologically, examination malpractices are a product of a society

that nurtures cheats and mediocre and turn them to celebrities. Therefore the desperation to pass

examination and obtain certificates in Nigeria stem from the fact that so much emphasis is placed

on certificate as a measure of preparedness for several socio-economic and political positions. The

author asserted that the resultant survival instinct is accompanied by all forms of examination

malpractices. The author also identified some cases that occur in the society that eventually lead to

examination malpractice. The situation has to do with shortage of qualified teachers and supply of

books, science equipments, as well as poor remuneration of teachers, supervisor and invigilators.

Under this condition, the syllabus for subjects may not be thoroughly treated or completed. The

option remaining is to help the students to cheat in order to pass. The teacher and other personnel,

who are poorly remunerated, are also ready to assist the students to cheat in order to get money.

Psychologically, it is believed that everybody has as strong need to succeed and will

succeed if they have positive concept and are exposed to the right environmental condition such as

curriculum, facilities and methods necessary for a maximum development of that potential.

However, if such unique conditions are lacking for an individual, then failure sets in even if such

individual have the right self-concept. In order to be branded a “success” people resort to cheating.

Nenty (2001). The author also said that behavioural psychologists believed that behaviors, whether

desirable or undesirable are mostly learnt. Behaviours that bring satisfaction tend to be repeated,

whereas those that bring dissatisfaction tend to be discontinued. Therefore, when some students

work hard and fail in examinations, may be due to unfavourable environmental conditions, they

may not want to go through that process again because it is not rewarding. Having seen how their

mates performed better through cheating during examinations, they also learn the undesirable

behaviour and thus, get involved in examination malpractices.

Denga (1993) viewed the factors responsible for examination malpractice into three:

psychological, environment and intelligence. The psychological factors include all the stress,

anxiety which is often induced in by parents, the peer pressure groups and students in trying to meet

the various demand of subject significantly. According to the author, the psychological factor also

brings in Maslow motivational theories; which emphasis the basic need i.e. physiological need of

man. Denga argued that these needs motivate and enhance learning; that if students physiological

needs are not physically meant, it will affect their concentration in a teaching/learning situation

thereby preparing the students’ cognitive at a very low level and encourage student to engage in all

sort of misconduct and malpractice during examination.

The environmental factor on the other hand, as to do with the crowed nature of our

classroom as well as examination halls with few invigilators during examination. Teachers inability

to cover up the stipulated syllabus for the period been stated before an internal or external

examination, like promotional examination, West African examination Council (WAEC) National

Examination Council (NECO) or Joint Admission Matriculation Board (JAMB), obsolete and

obscured instructional materials which are inadequate in the schools; may force some students to

cheat in an examination. While the Intellectual factors that causes examination malpractice, has to

do with individual difference in term of ability level. The author asserted that the concept of

individual difference must be built at the back of our mind when comparing competence, ability,

and comprehension from one student with another. The failure of students to recognize the fact that

the 1.Q (intelligent Quotient) differs and cannot be compared on is another factor. As such,

academically weak students will at times try to compare himself with naturally gifted student who

is brilliant. When the weak academic students are not able to meet up with the challenge; they

indulge themselves in all sorts of misconducts and malpractices.

Salami (1998) further elaborated this view from the psychological point that been intelligent

and been smart is two different concepts. Salami explained that ability to handle situation with what

is physically available within the limited time implies smart, while intelligent involves cognitive

and reaction to stimulus. According to the author, a smart student may not be intelligent but can

easily pass his/her examination than an intelligent student.

Other factors that influence examination malpractices are over zealousness of some school

heads (especially private school) to ensure that their schools have good results so as to boost their

ego or image. (Fayombo, 2004).

Forms of Examination Malpractices

Related literature in this subject has shown that examination malpractice Nigeria has

assumed different forms. Onyechere (2004) identified thirty - three types of examination

malpractices to include

(a) Using another person to sit for an examination on behalf of a candidate (impersonation).

Impersonation is becoming very rampant, even among school candidates. This was in support of

Afolabi (1998) who listed various methods that have been devised by students and these include:

(i) Posing as a bona-fide candidate i. e the impersonator.

(ii) Entry for similar subject: The plot is hatched right from the entry stage by making the

impersonator to enter for the same subjects and sit for the examinations in the hall with the

candidate. The impersonator writes the candidates name and number on his booklet, while

the candidate writes the impersonators’ and they exchange scripts before submitting.

(iii) Multiple entries: That is candidate entering for the same examination in several parts of the

locality.

(b) Bringing in prepared answers copying from textbooks notebooks, laboratory specimen or

any other instructional aids smuggled into the examination halls.

(c) Collaborating with an invigilator to cheat in the examination. Candidate who carried out this

form pay the invigilator an agreed amount of money to ensure the success of this act.

(d) Copying or attempting to copy other student’s answers in examination halls. This form is

also called giraffe; with or without the knowledge/ permission of the candidate.

Act 33 of 1999 identified some forms of examination malpractice to include:

(a) Submitting or attempting submits a new prepared answer script as a substituted for the

original scripts after an examination.

(b) Illegal removal of answer scripts from the examination hall.

(c) Insult or assault an examination officer. In this case, the aim is to distract them from

effective supervision, so that they can have their way out to indulge in examination

malpractice.

(d) Use of electronically assisted malpractices such as unauthorized scientific calculators,

organizers, compact disc (the smallest size) and mobile phone (GSM), to take

advantage of others.

(e) Inscribing materials or information on anything like parts of the body. For example

palms, thighs, dresses, handkerchief, rulers, purses, chairs, tables, walls of examination

hall and so on.

According to Akpa (2002) and Ogunsaju (1999), forms of examination malpractices to include:

(a) Leakage of examination question paper before the commencement of examination. In this

situation the students either copy the answers to the examination halls or read it before the

commencement of examination.

(b) Sexual harassment malpractice: This form of malpractice is usually carried out by female

candidate, who seduce the examination official/invigilators and may even go beyond

sleeping with them after examination, just to ensure that they are permitted to commit the

vice in other to pass.

(c) Sales of live question paper: This method is carried out before the time i.e before the day

the examination will take place. The students buy it from

(d) Custodian of the examination papers; get the solution before entering the examination hall.

(e) Ghost centres: Fictitious examination centres established by corrupt examination officials,

where candidates can complete the examination with support of helps, and without

supervision.

(f) External assistance which involves individuals who are not registered examination

candidates but who give unauthorized assistance to registered candidates. This form of

malpractice involves invigilators dictating answers, writing answers on the chalkboard,

circulating sheets of worked out answers during the cause of the examination, or acting as

carriers of unauthorized materials into the examination centre. In some instances, external

helps used pages and phones to broadcast answers.

Olanipekun (2003) stated that the forms of examination malpractices to include:

(a) Collusion: That is a situation where two more candidates agree to receive or give assistance

to each other. Supporting this view, Afolabi (1998) said that collusion involves exchange of

scripts, passing notes for help from outside and inside the examination hall, delaying in

commencement in one centre to obtain question paper from nearby centre which has started

etc. As such, collusion could be between two candidates, candidates and invigilators,

between school authority and invigilators, between parents and invigilators /candidates any

ingenious combination of these elements.

(b) Intimidation: Examination officials and supervisors are physically threatened and

intimidated to allow examination malpractices. This threat has always taken the form of

bringing thugs to surround the examination halls or school premised.

(c) Mass cheating: Where candidates in an examination hall at times are massively involved in

one or some of the forms of cheating aforementioned.

The West African Examination Council (WAEC) conducted a research in 2003 on various

tricks employed by students to cheat during examination and found 12 features that manifest in

their answer scripts. Some of the tricks as identified by the examination body include: similar

answers in a centre, the same mistake by various candidates, candidates scripts were exceptional

neat or rough as if written outside, out of range answer scripts, more than one handwritings,

forgetting microchips of notes in answer booklets, providing answers that are above the age level of

candidates. Chuta (1995) grouped examination malpractice into four:

(a) Live mercenary- whereby candidate brings into the examination hall somebody more

intelligent than himself to write the examination for the candidate; and in return the

candidate pays the mercenary, the supervisor and the invigilator who collaborated in making

the arrangement a reality.

(b) Hall assistance- Whereby candidates sitting for an examination pay the supervisor,

invigilator and the security agents so that they can bring into the examination hall materials

that would be of assistance to them.

(c) Express service- This type of malpractice is arranged in such a way that the candidate will

be present in the examination hall while his examination paper will be written outside the

examination hall or at the house of the supervisor. The supervisor, who in turn received

huge amount of money from the candidate, slips in the already answer script into the ones

written inside the hall at the end of the examination.

(d) Super Express Service- This is a situation whereby the candidate negotiates and pays the

supervisors so that his examination will be written in his house while the normal

examination goes on the examination halls. The candidate in question pays double the price

of express service.

There are also malpractices called pre-examination and post examination malpractices.

According to Onyechere (2004), in pre-examination malpractices candidates who are not prepared

well for examinations bribe in cash or kind to examiners, messengers, typist, examination officer,

invigilators or principles and those people connected with handling of examination materials so that

examination materials could be released to them before hand (Leakages). They then study the

materials with the view to memorize answers to the questions raised in the examination questions

they had access to before the actual examination.

Post- examination malpractice on the other hand is traceable to staff of public examination

boards. Candidates are aware of the fact that the results they get from public examination provide

the sole avenue for upward mobility and entry into tertiary institutions. As such, most candidates

who are not sure of their performance (success), pay staffs in public examination boards in charge

of either marking and recording or custodial of the scripts so as to increase or re-write/complete

examination questions.

Supporting the aforementioned, Joshua, Ekpoh, Edet, Joshua and Obo (2010) assert that

Examination Malpractice occurs in various dimensions in the school system, and at different stages

of the examination namely:- pre-examination phase, during examination and post-examination

phase. At each phase, the forms/dimensions differ; sometimes, the dimensions are peculiar to

institutions of learning where examination malpractice is practiced.

(a) Pre-Examination Phase

According to Joshua et al (2010), before the commencement of most public examinations,

some misconduct normally occurs, which include:-

(i) Registration of non-school candidates for monetary gains by the school

administrators.

(ii) Migration from towns to interior villages by students/candidates, some of them supported by

their parents/guardians.

(iii) False Continuous Assessment (CA) scores by teachers.

(iv) Registration of more candidates than the available functional sitting capacity in most

examination centres.

(v) Collection of money from candidates prior to examination dates by

Invigilators/supervisors to facilitate malpractices at examination halls.

(vi) Imposing impersonators’ photographs on original registration forms by school

administrators.

(vii) Sometimes, some candidates do pay for two registration forms.

(viii) Leakage from examination bodies where questions are circulated either through

soft/electronic or hard copies to anxious candidates for payments of various amounts of

money.

(b) During Examination Phase

Joshua et al (2010) asserted that it is almost impossible to enumerate the various forms of

examination malpractice that occur in schools. At this stage, the students are daring, ready to

implement their pre-planned dimensions of cheating “manufactured” by them. However, some

common malpractices include, copying from neighbours through girraffing, use of prepared

materials, notebooks, textbooks, magazines, asking questions from fellow candidates, using the

back side of question papers, using handkerchiefs, underwear’s (skirts, pants, singlet, pockets of

trousers) to write answers, use of cell phones within the hall with stored answers to receive and

send text message to their friends/mercenaries outside examination halls, use of prepared materials

copied on mathematical sets, stockings and socks, wrappers, etc, use of under caps/hats to hide

prepared materials, writing on designated desks and walls near seats in examination halls, placing

of reading materials in toilets to be used when using conveniences, strapping of prepared materials

to their thighs with rubber bands, deposition of prepared materials in braziers (common among

female students), and many other nefarious ways of cheating during examinations.

(c) Post-Examination Phase

The authors opined that examination malpractices often occur also after the examinations

must have been taken. Common forms at this stage include:-

i. Re-packaging of scripts to include those written outside examination hall in

collaboration with invigilators/supervisors.

ii. Payment of money to examiners/markers for some favours, including re-writing the

examination

iii. Corrupt practices of computer operators in examination bodies who obtain money from

candidates to change grades/scores.

iv. General “sorting”, particularly with officials of examination bodies and examiners to post

grades that they never earned or merited. (Joshua, 2008; Ojerinde, in Obo, 2008). The

World Bank Group (2002) also reported that examination malpractice may even include

creation of ghost centres, and also deliberate award of certificates to candidates who did not

even sit for examination.

Agents of Examination Malpractices

Evidence abound that various malpractices in Nigeria have their sources from either the

examiners who set and mark the paper, printers of the question paper, custodians, teachers, parent

and law enforcement agents (Onyechere, 2004). Onyechere listed students, subject teachers,

invigilators supervisors, principals and parents as agents of examination malpractice.

The Students: The primary culprits in this menace are the students themselves. Students are no

longer hardworking, they have little or no interest in studying to know and studying to face

examination on their own, they lack concentration during studies, have poor study habits and are

generally restless, lazy, and easily distracted by activities in the environment. Most students care

less about culture of hard work and academic excellence, and so become ill-prepared for most

examinations. Students no longer have confidence in themselves to write and pass any examination,

without cheating. Dishonesty has become the order of the day, while honesty during examinations

is no longer a virtue to covet by students. Dishonesty in examination halls is now an acceptable

behaviour and life style.

ii. The Teachers: Often times, shamefully, some teachers who are supposed to be custodians of

academic honesty and discipline, are perpetrators of examination malpractices in schools. Some

shameless teachers help students during examination by bringing into examination rooms worked

answers to the test items, writing the answers on the boards, and distracting invigilators/supervisors

by offering refreshments in the teachers’ offices during examinations to the officials. This is done

with the sole aim of allowing the students to cheat at will during examinations with the full support

and cooperation of teachers.

iii. Parents and Guardians: Some parents/guardians and other significant others in the family also

aid students to cheat during examinations. The parents become syndicates in perpetuating

examination malpractice because they are the sole financiers of some of the malpractice activities.

They provide monies to their children/wards for payment to different persons and agents of

examination malpractice. Often times, some parents go outright to negotiate with officials at

examination centres to look the other way, and allow their wards to cheat in examination halls, or

help in sending unauthorized materials to them. Some go directly to the examination bodies to

negotiate higher scores for their children/wards.

iv. Examination Bodies/Invigilators: Many examination officers who conduct

examinations for West African Examination Council (WAEC), National Examination Council

(NECO) and Joint Admission and Matriculation Board(JAMB) are perpetrators of examination

malpractice. Money is at the centre of the many reasons these officers refuse to adhere to

examination ethics.

v. Principals: The author asserted that many school principals are the biggest perpetrators in quest

to have their schools premise praised and recognized. These principals settle external invigilator,

supervisors and examiners with gifts and cash into overlooking the fraudulent assistance given to

the students during examination period by subject teachers and other accomplices.

Sonnie (2004), also include examination officials, law enforcement agents, as agents of

examination malpractice; to the extent that they even help in circulating the answer scripts among

the students. According to the author, the law enforcement agents such as the police personnel often

drafted to maintain discipline, keep rules and regulations, are often greatly involved in examination

malpractice. They do this by collecting large sums of money from students and school authorities to

allow students to cheat during examinations. This in itself is very disappointing for a developing

nation like Nigeria.The author also said that youths in the community also participate in the act.

They collect money from the students, use part of the money to settle/bribe supervisors and

invigilators to look the way out, and where they could get cooperation from the supervisor, they dig

trenches on the road leading to their community so that examination body supervisors would not

reach the school, while the examination is in progress.

The editorial comment of vanguard (2004) opined that youths in the community involved in

the act of examination fraud by taking in the grab of an organized business, where special

examination centres and schools provide safe heaven for the examination fraudsters. Most of these

special centres operate under the guise of tutorial centres and students registered by “examination

contractors’ are those who can afford the co-operation fees.

In the same vein, Umar (2003) stated that there now abounds throughout the country a

multitude of private tutorial classes that offer expensive lessons to candidates. He remarked that

most of such classes are used as points for examination malpractices where questions papers are

purchased prior to the examination days. The coordinators of such classes collect large sums of

money from student’s to buy question papers and to pay fraudsters that answer the questions and

have them taken into examination halls with the aid of the invigilators and the security men. The

collusion of one or more of these agents made it difficult to eradicate this menace called

examination malpractice.

Different views exists as to which gender involved most (agents) in this social vice called

examination malpractice. In the study carried out by Lobel and Levenon (1998), revealed that male

engage in examination malpractice than female. Supporting this view, Esere and Arewale (2000),

observed that male adolescent get more involved in examination malpractice than female. This

disposition of male adolescents may not be unconnected with the general belief that males are very

brave and could take risks and instance hardship than the females. Leming (1990) believes that

there is more female involvement in examination malpractice than the male. This was also

supported by Oredein, (2004), who argued empirically that girls find it easy to inscribe information

on any parts of their body like thighs, baby pampers, purses and palms than their male counterparts.

In contrary to the above studies, Olatoye (2006) reveals that examination malpractice is not a

function of sex, rather, it is a general phenomenon among male and female students. This means

that both male and female students have equal chance in being involved in examination malpractice.

Reasons for Persistence of Examination Malpractice

Experience has shown that most malpractices go undetected. According to Uwadiae (2003),

one of the reasons why it persists is because the 1999 examination malpractice Act has not been

implemented to the letter. Although the act stipulated three and four years imprisonment with or

without option of fine, nobody has so far been arraigned in court in spite of the large number caught

red handed. The author also said that some of the hindrances to the application of the law could be

one or more of the following.

(a) Examination authorities have little legal or political backing to punish offences irrespective

of their class or status.

(b) Where the necessary legislation is in place, police and judicial authorities may either be

corrupt or are unwilling to enforce the law.

(c) The political will to enforce the law is not present.

(d) Politicians who help appoints officials for examination authorities may seek “favours on

behalf of constituents”. They are unlikely to support tough measures to promote the

integrity of the examination system.

From the above, it could be concluded that the problems is not the inadequacy of the

provision of the Act rather, it is lack of proper implementation of these provisions. It is certain

therefore, if properly applied, the law could serve as deterrent to prospective examination

fraudsters, be they parents, student, examination officials, invigilators, principals, teacher and

other agents of examination malpractice.

Another reason for persistence of examination malpractice is the anomie nature of our

society (Ojeikere, 2004). According to the author, anomie is concerned as a breakdown in the

cultural structure due to disjunction between the cultural norms and goals and the socially

structured capacities of members of the group to act in accord with them. Anomie gives birth to

aberrant behaviour and non conformity, which is symptom of disassociation between culturally

prescribed goals and socially prescribed means for realizing these goals. A society that places

exceptionally strong emphasis on goal achievement without a corresponding emphasis on

institutionalized means of achieving those goals is bond to exert pressure on some members of the

society that may eventually resort to the use of any technically expedient means in achieving these

goals irrespective of whether the means employed is legitimate or not.

Ndibe, cited in Ojeikere (2004) claimed that, the disjunction between culturally acclaimed

these goals coupled with the cultural context of great emphasis in success-goals without equivalent

emphasis upon institutional means of attaining these goals have created an environment that

predisposes some students, parent, teachers and others to malpractice. Students are involved

because they want to achieve success; parents are involved because they want good grades for their

children, teachers and others are involved because of the financial, materials and other intangible

gains derivable from involvement in examination malpractice.

Onyechere (2004) identified the emphasis placed on certificate and good grades as criteria

for securing employment in Nigeria as one of that reasons for persistence of examination

malpractice. Most employers of labour emphases on certificate, not the skill from employees before

they can be employed. They even go further to employ candidates who have grades as: first class,

second class upper, distinctions, upper credit, not minding the fact whether they acquire the skill to

defend these grades. Candidate who depend on their ability and have low grade tend to be at a

disadvantage. As such they devise all sorts of malpractice to ensure that they meet up with the

requirement or standard that will enable them secure better results and better employment; rather

than knowledge, skill and competence.

Afolabi (1998) stated that the reason for persistence on examination malpractice is that

mediocre is celebrated while virtue is punished. A situation where successful people in the country

are celebrated, not minding how the success came about, encourages youths to continue to strife for

success whether by means of crook or hooks. This ambition also goes down to our educational

system; where no body wants to fail.

Lack of employment is another reason for persistence of examination malpractice

(Fayombo, 2004). The author explained that a lot of graduates in Nigeria have no job and more are

still graduating to join the queue. Nigeria encourages the creation of various universities (state,

federal and private) without considering if they have enough industrials or ministries to

accommodate. The unemployed graduate must survived at all cost. As such they indulged

themselves in all sort of malpractice, not minding the consequence, just to get money from the

students for their survival. Considering the monetary rewards accruing to participants of

examination malpractice (enormous and unimaginable), why, would those involved in the conduct

of examination not accept monetary incentive to subvert the conduct of examination to alleviate

poverty. The author also asserted that teachers, principals, invigilators and supervisors who are

poorly paid, use examination malpractice as a means of poverty alleviation. Parents, who know the

ability of their children and may want to ensure their success, so as to avoid enrolling for their

children more than once, may indulge in the act so as to safe them, from subsequent spending in

enrolment of their children.

In agreement with the aforementioned, Aminu (2006) also include greed for money as one

of the reasons for persistence of examination malpractice. He explained that principals, teachers,

invigilators and supervisors indulged in the act because of greed for money. They want to be highly

recognized and achieve more than what their income can accrue; and as such get involved in

malpractice to use the money to boast their ego.

Effect of Examination Malpractice

The effect of examination malpractices is many and enormous as both the nation and the

individual have direct share of them. Onyechere (2004) identified some of the effect of examination

malpractice to include:

(a) It discourages good students/candidates from studying hard - Good candidates are

tempted to believed that “if you cannot beat them, join them” especially as they see other

candidates get away with their corrupt behaviours.

(b) It derives innocent student’s opportunity for admission - Many students have been

denied admission by the corrupt ones who through examination malpractices have better

scores and grades.

(c) Decrease job efficiency- This has a serious implication on the gross domestic product of

our country. It also has effect on general quality and standard. Imagined the havoc a half-

baked medical doctor could wreck on human lives. What about teacher who cannot

competently handle the subject they are trained to teach. Imagine the effect on the student.

There is a chain effect of examination malpractice in the educational system and the society

as a whole.

Sooze (2004) claimed that some of the effects of examination malpractice include:

(a) Dissatisfaction on the part of the candidates- In the quest to ensure success by all means,

candidates may indulge in malpractice knowing that they cannot defend the certificates they

possess. In some instances, they will not be bold to present the certificates to safe them the

embarrassment, because they can be presented with tasks that will require them to defend the

certificates.

(b) It renders the goals of education invalid- The actualization of the goals of education will

continue to be a mirage if the scourge of examination malpractice is not eradicated from the system.

The country will end up producing graduates who lack the knowledge, skill and competence to

exploit the resources of the nation. Besides, the graduates will lack the right type of values and

attitude needed for survival in a globalized economy.

(c) Youths of the country will sow and nurture this fraudulent behaviour in any organization

they find themselves. As such, the fight for corruption cannot succeed if examination malpractice

continues to be endemic in the educational system. As leaders of tomorrow who have gone through

a school system characterized by academic fraud and dishonesty, they will be destined to a life of

crime, fraud and corrupt practices.

Ahmed (1996) lamented that the menace called examination malpractice has so eaten up our

educational system that it has discredits our certificates. Most employers of labour require certain

skills from their employees based on the certificates they hold. These employers are disappointed

when their employees perform grossly below expectation, despite the outstanding certificates they

possessed. The author also explained that the introduction of post JAMB screening

in various universities is also as a result of the faith lost on the certificates presented by candidates

seeking admission in tertiary institution.

In agreement with the aforementioned, Word Bank (2004), stated that the effect of

examination malpractice should also include loss of credibility. The implication is that documents

emanating from such country will be treated with suspicious. Examination malpractice reduces the

quality of manpower development of our country (Fayombo, 2004). The quality of manpower

development of any country is a direct proportion to the quality of its educational system. So a

country with shaky and porous educational system will have very poor manpower, as the

psychometric value of certificates obtained through malpractice in examinations will be worthless.

Strategies for Curbing Examination Malpractice

In order to forestall a hitch free examination many experts have attempted to provide some

possible solutions for curbing examination malpractice from our educational system. Ene and

Ursula (1998) opined that government should provide conducive learning environment in schools

by providing learning facilities and enhanced remuneration for teachers to avoid incessant strike

actions. Other steps they suggested include government should be serious with Act of 1999 and

enforce it; staff of examination bodies should be well paid so that they will not be entice with

money; enough resources must be made available for the conduct of examination.

Fagbemi (1998) suggested that proper orientation on examination malpractices and its

consequences should be carried out by the governments, examination bodies and institutions.

Sitting arrangement of students in an examination should be changed on daily basis as well as the

supervisors. Invigilators should conduct exams in a ratio of about one to twenty students. Fagbemi,

(2001) also opined some strategies to adopted in fighting exam malpractice. These strategies are

public campaigns, informing students on the rules and regulations guiding its examination, punitive

action on candidates and WACE staff involved in malpractice and creation of a whole department

headed by a deputy registrar to handle cases of malpractice. The author also reported the use of

continuous assessment (C.A) adopted by National Examination Council (NECO) as a strategies for

curbing examination malpractice. Since the scores in C.A maybe inflated by the school teachers,

National Examination council (NECO) has devised a means called ‘technical failure”. If candidate

score 70/70 in their examination and less than twelve (12) (40% of 30) in C. A. at all, they have

failed. To pass NECO examination, a candidate must score at least an average of twenty (20) in

their C. A.

. Orbih (2006) suggests that empowerment of teachers on how to control this vice should also

be adopted, to facilitate eradication of examination malpractice. According to the author, teachers

cannot provide experience and activities that guide students” progress towards understanding of

ideas if they themselves don’t know what these ideas are, neither can they provide experienced that

challenge students understanding if they themselves share the same misunderstanding. The

implication of this is that teacher should be well equipped in terms of robust salary, special welfare,

well funded programmes, conducive environment as well as moral enlightment on the causes,

effects and consequences of examination malpractice. These will enable them strife to see that this

menace is stopped. In the same vein, Onyechere (2004) suggests Nigeria union of Teacher (NUT)

and Teachers’ Registrant Council (TRC) to blacklist those who connive with students to perpetuate

examination malpractices. Through this, the rate of malpractice will be reduced, the author believes.

Nwadiani (2005) suggested that less emphasis should be place on certificates and paper

qualifications. Nigerians education system is largely certificate oriented. So much value and

emphasis are placed on certificates instead of knowledge, skills and competence, that it promote the

tendency of cheating and as long as this trend is allowed to continue, the country will end up with

doctors who cannot differentiate between vein and artery, lawyers, who cannot differentiate

between an accused person and the complainant and teachers who may not be able to spell the

names of their students correctly.

In view of the aforementioned, Badmus (2006), suggested that a special welfare package

should be put in place for examination officials to discourage them from financial and material

inducements from students, Parents and others who may want to subvert examination process.

These examination officials includes teachers who invigilate examinations, supervisor who

oversees the conduct of examinations in schools, officers of examination bodies who monitor the

conduct of examinations, and law enforcement agents who are in charge of security in examination

centres. While Bassey, Bessong, Onete, Etim and Achigbe (2010), and Olatoye (2006), summarize

some of the strategies for curbing examination malpractice into three (3) phases viz: pre-

examination, during examination, and post- examination strategies.

Pre-Examination Strategies for Curbing Examination Malpractice.

As have been shown in the studies carried out by Bassey et al (2010) and Olatoye (2006),

the following are some of the strategies adopted in curbing pre- examination malpractice:

• A Syllabus for the examination should be made available and ahead of time.

• The time table, which should not be loaded, should get to the students at least one month

before the examination.

• Selection of the test items which should be under tight security and should be within the

syllabuses and the difficulty level should be average.

• Proper inspection of schools before granting the school approval to prepare students for

public examination. Only schools that meet the minimum standards should be granted to

register students for public examinations.

• Proper registration of candidates with a clear photograph, which must be checked against

the candidates’ persons during the examination.

• Proper check of students before entering the examination halls to ensure that there are no

foreign materials with them.

• Arrangement of the sitting position in such that students sit far apart from each other.

• Public campaigns and seminars on the danger and consequences of examination

malpractice.

• There should be no registration by proxy.

Strategies for Curbing Examination Malpractice during the Conduct of Examination.

Bassey et al (2010) and Olatoye (2006), asserted that three groups are important in the

conduct of examination namely, the candidates, the invigilators and the supervisors. As such, the

following are the strategies by these three groups to ensure that examination is free from

malpractice.

1. Candidates

• All candidates should be in the examination hall at least ten minutes before the advertised

time of the examination.

• Each student should complete an attendance form to be collected by the invigilator of each

paper.

• A candidate could be admitted into the examination thirty minutes after its

commencement but should not be given extra time.

• Any candidate leaving the examination hall briefly should be closely supervised.

• A candidate should not leave the hall during the first hour of the examination.

• All candidates must have identity cards.

• No book, printed paper, written document should be taken into an examination hall.

• Candidates must not ‘spy’ each other’s work.

• All scripts should be handed over to the invigilator before leaving the hall, and must endorse

by the invigilator signature.

• No candidate should have fore-knowledge of any question.

• Prohibit the use of electronic devises such as G.S.M, pagers e.t.c. in the examination halls.

2. Invigilators and supervisors

• Be in possession of any question paper after the commencement of the

examination.

• Read the contents of any question paper or explain same to the candidates.

• Invigilate the subject he teaches or the one that he is related to, what he is

certificated in.

• There should be more frequent unannounced visits to examination centers by officials of

examination bodies.

• Security personnel should be given the entire necessary mandate to enforce the rules and

regulations.

• Strict enforcement of not allowing a student in the examination hall as stated in Section 12

of the Act after the 30 minutes grace granted to late comers.

• Ensure that there is faming of examination papers during the examination.

Strategies for Curbing Post- Examination Malpractices

As reported by Bassey et al (2010) and Olatoye (2006), the following are some of

the strategies should be adopted in curbing post examination malpractices in public

examinations:

• Public examination bodies should apply the relevant laws with regards to penalties

and promptly as stated in Act 20 of 1999.

• Government should be involved in the fight against examination malpractice by

ensuring that this Act is enforced without bias accordingly to whosoever is involved

and convicted.

• Presence of unauthorized materials among the candidates’ scripts should be recorded

and the candidates penalized accordingly.

• Presence of neatly written materials unrelated to examination questions in the middle

of hurriedly written materials should be detected by the markers and reported to

appropriate authorities for action.

• Identical mistakes and peculiarities in scripts of candidates sitting close to each

other show involvement in examination malpractice and then appropriate section of

the Act applied accordingly.

• Answers written on papers other than the one provided for should be

discountenanced.

• Well-written answers with only few errors should be properly examined to find out

if they do not arise from examination malpractice. Those involved should be found

out and punished appropriately.

• Blacklisting of the schools involved in examination malpractice.

• Embossing photographs on certificates .This render the certificates useless in the

case of impersonation.

Theoretical Framework

For the purpose of this study, the following theories will be examined:

(a) Classical Test Theory.

(b) Attribution theory.

Classical Test Theory

Classical Test Theory was introduced by Spearman Brown in 1904. This theory assumes that

the raw score or observed score (X) obtained by any individual is made up of a true score (T) and

an error score (E).

i.e., X = T + E

where: T and E are independent.

A person’s observed score is simply the score giving by the examiner in a given

examination as representing the student’s ability. While a person’s true score is defined as the

expected number of correct scores over an infinite number of independent administrations of the

particular test. That is to say, a person’s true score is what he/she actually knows. Error on the other

hand, is defined as those factors which prevent a correct test measure from been perfectly reliable.

As such, error score is defined as that part of the observed test score due to factors other than what

the examinee knows or can do. It represents the error/mistake purposely or inadvertently introduced

into the measurement process to either inflate or deplete the students’ true score in a given

examination.

It is to be noted that the undeserved or strange scores brought about by examination

malpractice is embedded in error score (E). A cursory look at the equation shows that:

i) The difference between X and T is the Error Score (E);

ii) It is our noble desire that as much as possible, X is close to, if not equal to, T;

iii) The smaller the value of E, the closer is X to T (in fact, if E is zero, X = T).

Conversely, the larger the value of E (courtesy of Examination malpractice), the farther is X

from T.

iv) If E is very large, T diminishes, and X approaches E.

This implies that the higher the value of error score occasioned by examination

malpractices, the more the school and public examination scores deviate or diminish from true

abilities of those who make or own those scores. Little wonder then that some owners of high

scores in our school/public examinations can hardly perform or exhibit behaviours that are

consistent with the high scores; and how some school graduates can hardly perform to the

expectation of the society/employers. That is the harm caused by examination malpractice.(Joshua

et al, 2010).

The above explanation is relevant when the interest is on assessment of students’ cognitive

domain. When emphasis is placed on assessment of the psychometric characteristics such as

attitude, belief, personality, interest, and other opinion related variable, other component of CTT

like validity and reliability of an instrument becomes a pertinent issue. However the focus here is

on construct validity which is concerned with the extent to which a research instrument measures a

particular psychological (social) construct. Construct are inventories of the mind, which do not have

any physical representation but can be use in describing, understanding and explaining social

behaviour. For establishing this type of validity involves a statistical procedure known as factor

analysis is used. Factor analysis is a collection of methods used to examine how underlying

construct influence the responses on a number of measured variables. Factor analysis is frequently

used to develop questionnaires, to ensure that the questions asked relate to the constructs that is

intended to measure.

This theory is relevance to the study, in the sense that this study is concerned with

determining the perception of education sector stakeholders on the effectiveness of the strategies

adopted to curb examination malpractice in public examination and in other to elicit information

from the respondent a questionnaire will be developed and used for data collection. The instrument

will be factorially analysed using factor analysis to ensure the construct validity of the instrument

and therefore yield the desired result.

Attribution Theory

Attribution theory was first proposed by Fritz Heider in 1958. It was further developed by

others such as Harold Kelly and Benard Weiner. Attribution theory is a theory about how people

perceive, explain things, and how people make causal explanation about how they answer questions

beginning with ‘why’. This theory is developed within social psychology as a means of dealing

with questions of social perception. Heider grouped attribution theory into two types:

1. Explanatory attribution

2. Interpersonal attribution

In explanatory attribution, people make explanatory attributions to understand the world and

seek reasons for a particular event. It plays an important role in understanding what is happening

around us. Interpersonal attribution on the other hand, occurred when the cause of event involve

two or more individual. To explore the nature of interpersonal attribution, Heider in his theory

believed that people observe, perceive, analyse and explain behavior with explanation that differ

from various individuals. Based on this, Heider found it very necessary to divide explanation into

two categories: internal (personal) and external (situational) attributions.

When internal attribution is made, the cause of the given behavior is assigned to the

individual characteristics such as ability, personality, mood, effort, attitudes or disposition. In

essence they are attributions that are believed to be under the control of the individual. When an

external attribution is made, the cause of the given behavior is assigned to the situation in which the

behavior was seen such as the task, other people, or by environmental or social situation. As such,

Heider summarize this theory by saying that these two types of attributions lead to a very different

perceptions of an individual engaging in a behavior.

This theory is considered useful to this study in the sense that examination malpractice is a

social vice and it is perceived differently by individuals in the society based on internal or external

or both attributions. In the same vain, students are involved in examination malpractice not only

because they not adequately prepared, but because of societal influenced. The societal emphasis on

success-goals, irrespective of the means employed in achieving these goals. Parents are involved

because they do not want their children to fail, teachers and others are involved because of the

financial gain, material and other intangible gains derived from involvement in examination

malpractice. To them it is a way to alleviate poverty. However the researcher’s interests is to

determine how education sector stakeholders perceived the effectiveness of the strategies adopted to

curb this social vice called examination malpractice.

Related Empirical Studies

Educators who feel worried about the adverse effect of examination malpractice are

interested in identifying practical ways of addressing it in Nigeria schools. This is because, if it is

not checked, the trend will destroy the essence and relevance of education on Nigeria. Already,

examination malpractice is posing a problem at all levels of Nigerian education, especially at the

secondary school level. A number of studies have been reported regarding the incidence of

examination malpractice, including gender issues related to it.

Gender and Examination Malpractice

Badejo and Gandonu (2001) carried out a research study on the predisposing factors towards

examination malpractice among students in Lagos Universities: Implication for counseling. The

researchers adopted descriptive survey design involving 120 males and 120 females from the

faculty of education in the two public universities in Lagos State, using simple random techniques

to draw the sample. A questionnaire on the Predisposing Factor towards Examination Malpractice

(PFTEMQ) was developed by the researchers to source for data. Percentage was used to answer the

research questions, while one- way ANOVA was used to test the null hypotheses respectively.

Findings among others showed that gender was no indices for examination malpractice among

students. In view of this, the implication for counseling was recommended.

Olasehinde- Williams, Abdullahi, & Owolabi (2003) carried out a study on the relationship

between background variables and cheating tendencies among students of a federal university in

Nigeria. The study adopted descriptive survey design involving 268 final year students of the

faculty of education, 2001-2003 academic sessions in Illorin, using simple random sampling

techniques. An attitude towards cheating questionnaire and a multiple- choice achievement test on

developmental psychology were developed by the researchers to source data. Percentage was used

to answer the research questions, while t- test was used to test the null hypotheses. Result among

other revealed that more male than females were involved in cheating in an examination. As such,

the need for educational evaluators and psychologies to initiate more objective means of assessing

learning outcomes was emphasized. Omotere (2010) carried out a study on Age, Sex and Anxiety

as a predictor of examination malpractice among secondary schools students, using Ijebu- ode

Local Government Area of Ogun State as a case study. The sample for the study was 200 students

drawn randomly (100 males and 100 females) from 4 secondary schools in the area, using simple

random techniques. The instrument utilized for the study was questionnaire named “Questionnaire

for Examination Malpractice among Students” (QMAS). The data was analyzed using step wise

regression and the findings include that more females than males are involved in examination

malpractice. Recommendations include adequate counseling and assistance should be given to

students to shun examination malpractice.

From the empirical evidence above, there seems to be no consensus on the gender that is

more involved in examination malpractice. However, gender being a variable in this present study,

the researcher seeks to find out if gender difference will have a significant effect on how they

perceived the effectiveness of the strategies adopted to curb examination malpractice in public

examinations.

Education sector Stakeholders and Examination malpractice.

Joshua, Obo, Joshual, Edet and Ekpoh (2010) carried out a study on perception of

examination malpractice, and preferred intervention strategies by some stakeholders in the Nigeria

school system. The design for the study was survey, with a sample of 1000 education stakeholders

(comprising of students, teachers, parents and school administrators) was drawn from secondary

schools in Calabar education Zone of Nigeria , using stratified random sampling techniques. A

structured questionnaire was used to collect the data which were treated with percentage to answer

the research questions and t-test and one –way ANOVA to test the null hypotheses. Results for the

study indicate that majority of education stakeholders perceive examination malpractice as a means

of rendering help, meeting high expectations, boosting school image, and compensating for school

inadequacies, and not a factor in lowering standard. Recommendations include serious instant

sanctions should be visited on confirmed victims, perpetrators, supporters and sponsors of

examination malpractice..

Omonijo (2010) conducted a research on parental influence on wards in examination

misconduct in Nigeria. The design for the study is cross sectional design with a sample of 545

education sector stakeholders from Private Christian Mission University in the country, using

proportionate sampling techniques. Questionnaire was administered to students and staff of the

universities, while in- depth interview was conducted to the selected head of departments. Ranking,

percentage and 3 ways analysis of variance were used to analyze the data collected. The result

showed that there is a relationship between parental influence on ward in escalating examination

misconduct and societal value for certificates. Following the findings of this study, it was

recommended that high value on paper qualifications should be replaced with practical

demonstration of knowledge in work settings in Nigeria. It was also recommended that seminars

and workshops should be organized for parents on how to inculcate moral integrity into their

children as trainers and co-trainers of wards in the family level.

Idahosa (2004) carried out a study on the perceived causes of malpractice in public

examinations by fresh students of ST. Augustine’s College of Education, Akoka , Lagos State. The

design for the study was descriptive survey with a sample made up of 100 respondents from ST.

Augustine’s College of Education, Akoka, using simple random sampling technique. The

instrument used for data collection was Examination Malpractice in public Examination (EMPEQ),

while frequency counts and percentage were used to analyze the data. Result revealed that the

predominate factors responsible for examination malpractice in public examinations conducted by

the WAEC and NECO were found to include lack of trained teachers in secondary schools, corrupt

WAEC and NECO officials and supervisors, who allow examination malpractices for money and

difficulty in getting into tertiary institutions. It was therefore concluded that concerted efforts have

to be made at the examination agencies’ level to check the actions of corrupt officials in order to

check examination malpractices which occur in public examinations conducted by WAEC and

NECO.

Results from the studies above reviewed some of the causes, agents of examination

malpractice and strategies to curb it as perceived by educational stakeholders. However, this present

study is carried out to determine the effectiveness of the strategies adopted to curb examination

malpractice as perceived by some of these educational stakeholders.

Summary of Literature Review

The summary of the literature presented show the various sub-headings that were relevant

and related to the present literature. The conceptual framework for the study was presented and

explained. In particular, theories found most relevant to the study (classical test theory, and

attribution theory) were also stated, explained and their relationship to this study was also drawn.

The empirical studies were reviewed under gender and examination malpractice; stakeholders and

examination malpractice. In conclusion many studies have been carried out by eminent scholars in

the field of examination malpractices to determine the cause, effect, agents as well as strategies to

curb examination malpractice from the perception of various educational stakeholders, yet there are

no studies on how educational stakeholders perceive the effectiveness of the strategies adopted to

curb examination malpractice in public examinations, hence the gap this study will fill.

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter describes the methods adopted for conducting the study. The chapter is

organised under the following sub-headings: design of the study, area of study, population of the

study, sample and sampling sechniques, instrument for data collection, validation of the instrument,

reliability of the instrument, method of data collection, and methods of data analysis.

Design of the Study

This study is a survey design study. Nworgu (2006) defined surveys design as those studies

which aim at collecting data on, and describing in a systematic manner, the characteristic features or

facts about a given population. This design is considered appropriate because the researcher was

only interested in describing the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing examination

malpractice in public examinations as perceived by various education sector stakeholders.

Area of the Study

This study was carried out in Delta state. Delta State is in the South-South geographical

zone, comprising mainly Igbo, Urhobo, Isoko, Ijaw, and Itsekiri. The ethnic groups that comprise

Deltans are administratively stratified into three (3) senatorial zones namely: Delta North, Delta

South, and Delta central for easy administration purposes. Delta State is oil producing State and

nationwide known for its unique Pidgin English. The researcher chooses Delta State for her study

because of the incessant examination malpractice in the State (Vanguard, 2004).

Population of the Study

The population of the study comprised parents, principals, teachers, and senior secondary

school students of all the 342 Public Senior Secondary Schools in Delta State. The population size

for principals is 342, teachers 4,503 and students 87,418 in the 342 public senior secondary schools

in Delta State. .

*Source: Delta State Post –Primary Education Board. (See Appendix I).

Sample and Sampling Techniques

The sample for the study was 1000 education sector stakeholders, made up of 34 principals,

250 teachers, 646 senior secondary school students, and 70 parents from 10 Local Government

Areas in the state. The sampling techniques adopted for selecting the sample for the study is multi-

stage sampling techniques. This technique includes simple random sampling techniques,

proportionate random sampling techniques, and purposive sampling techniques.

Simple random sampling, based on sampling without replacement was used to draw the 10

Local Government Areas from the 3 senatorial districts in Delta state, making a total of 10 local

Government Areas, and the schools to be used for the study. In order to randomly sample the 10

Local Government Area, the names of the Local Government Areas in a particular stratum was

labelled and folded on a piece of paper and put on a container and shuffled. A student was asked to

dip her hand in the container and pick a paper. The Local Government Area on any of the paper

picked was recorded until the required number was selected. The same was repeated in composing

the schools from the 10 Local Government Areas. The distribution of the sampled schools drawn

was presented in Appendix II.

Proportionate random sampling was used to draw the required number of schools from each

of the 10 sampled Local Government Areas. A total of 34 senior secondary schools were drawn

from 130 schools in the sampled Local Government Areas. A breakdown of the 34 secondary

schools show that 6 were drawn from Ethiope East, 2 from Uvwie, 3 from Oshimili South, 4 from

Ika North East, 3 from Warri South, 1 from Warri South West,3 from Sapele,3 from Ukwuani, 4

from Isoko North ,and 5 from Aniocha South Local Government Areas respectively.

. The sample of teachers and students mentioned are shown in Appendix III. All the

principals from the randomly sampled 34 senior secondary schools were used for the study. Parent

on the other hand, were drawn, using purposive sampling techniques. The condition for purposive

sampling techniques was:

• The researcher was only interested on parents that are literate, as the researcher would

not want a third party to help read or explain the content of the instrument. This group of

respondents were reached at a Parents Teachers Association (PTA), and through their

children/ward.

Instrument for Data Collection

The instrument used for data collection for the study was Stakeholders Perceptions of the

Effectiveness of the Strategies for Curbing Examination Malpractice Questionnaire (SPESCEMQ)

developed by the researcher, based on the literature reviewed. It consists of two parts. Part 1 is

personal data section, was used to collect personal information from the respondents. Part 2 consist

of 78 items arranged in three (3) clusters. Cluster one (1) was used to examine the perception of

various education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in

curbing pre- examination malpractice in public examinations. Cluster two (2) was used to examine

the perception of various education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the

strategies adopted in curbing examination malpractice during examinations. While cluster three (3)

was used to examine the perception of various education sector stakeholders with respect to the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing post- examination malpractice in public

examinations.

The questions were constructed on a 4 point rating scale Very Effective (V.E) = 4, Effective

(E) = 3, Slightly Effective (S.E) = 2, and Not Effective, (N.E) = 1. In order to complement the

findings from the use of questionnaire, in-depth interview was conducted with some selected public

examination board officials (WAEC and NECO), and focus group discussion with some students

from the sampled schools (See Appendix IV for interview schedule).

Validation of the Instrument

The instrument, Stakeholders Perceptions of the Effectiveness of the Strategies for Curbing

Examination Malpractice Questionnaire (SPESCEMQ), was validated in two phases. First phase,

the SPESCEMQ was face validated by four experts in Measurement and Evaluation in University

of Nigeria, Nsukka (see Appendix V). The experts were required to critically examine the

instrument in terms of relevance to the research questions and hypotheses, the language level used

in developing the items and the clarity of the questions asked, as well as the adequacy of the items

and extent to which it covers the subject matter. The suggestions of the valuators include: recasting

of the statements, eliminating some items that are ambiguous and inclusion of some items relevant

to the research questions/ hypotheses. Suggestions from these validators formed the basis for

revision of the first instrument, which gave birth to the second instrument with 70 items (see

Appendix VI).

In order to ensure the construct validity of the instrument, fifty copies of the instrument

drafted was first administered to fifty education sector stakeholders that is, 3 principals, 12 teachers,

and 24 Senior Secondary School students and 11 parents, in two secondary schools in Delta State, for

trial testing. The schools are, Erejuwa II Secondary School, Ode- Itsekri and Ogbe-Ijoh Grammer

School, Ogbe-Ijoh . These schools do not form part of the sampled schools, to avoid bias of results.

The responses of the trial testing of the instrument to individual items were subjected to factor

analysis, (see Appendix VII). The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method was used in

extracting the factors which were then rotated using the Varimax rotation method with Kaiser

Normaliztion. The analysis extracted three components/factors and as recommended by Taraban

(2004), for accepting an item in terms of item loading to a factor, the researcher adopted a criterion of

0.30 minimum factor loading standard. For the factor analysis, Appendix VII in particular was used

for item loading. Twenty items were found to be factorially impure, as they could not load highly in

any of the 3 factors, while eight items were found to be factorially complex, as they loaded in more

than one factor. As such, twenty-eight items were dropped after factorial validation, while forty-two

items in all emerged for the final version of the SPESCEMQ (see Appendix VIII). In this case, the

best 10 items per factor/ cluster (making a total of 30 items) were chosen for easy administration.

(See Appendix IX).

Reliability of the Instrument

After trial testing, the instrument was subjected to test of internal consistency using

Cronbach Alpha (r). Cluster 1, which comprise of 27 strategies has a reliability index of 0.77 ,

cluster 2, which comprise of 22 strategies has a reliability index of 0.87, while cluster, with 21

strategies has a reliability index of 0.85 . The overall clusters, which comprise of 70 strategies has a

reliability index of 0.86. See Appendix XI.

Method of Data Collection

To ensure high percentage return of the duly completed research instrument, data collection

was carried out personally by the researcher, with the help of research assistants in the persons of

class teachers, school/class prefects and students themselves (especially in reaching their parents).

The entire questionnaire to be administered was retrieved and analyzed.

Method of Data Analysis

Data collected for this study were analyzed, using mean for answering the research

questions and one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for testing hypotheses 1,3 and 5, while t-

test will be use for testing hypotheses 2,4 and 6 respectively. For this study, an item mean of 3.5

and above, indicate very effective (V.E), 2.5 to 3.49 was considered effective (E), 1.5 to 2.49 was

considered slightly effective (S.E), while below 1.5, was considered not effective. On the other

hand, a percentage of 50 and above was considered effective (E), while below 50%, not effective

(NE).

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

This chapter present the results of the data analysis based on 4 research questions and 9

hypotheses that guided this study.

Research Question One

What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders with respect to

the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice?

Table 1: Mean perception ratings of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

Item Strategies Students

_

X SD

Teachers

_

X SD

Principals

_

X SD

Parents

_

X SD

1 Providing enough personnel for supervision and invigilation of public examination.

1.80 0.63 1.83 0.63 1.77 0.74 1.80 0.64

2 Pasting fliers on the penalties of examination malpractice at all examination centres.

1.98 0.64 1.98 0.63 1.94 0.65 2.00 0.64

3 Registration of students with their e-passports.

1.73 0.58 1.76 0.60 1.59 0.50 1.83 0.61

4 Ensuring that examination questions are within the syllabus and of average difficulty level of the students.

1.84 0.70 1.88 0.71 1.76 0.74 1.97 0.66

5 Ensuring that teachers, invigilators, and supervisors are well remunerated to guard against involvement in malpractice.

1.84 0.61 1.85 0.61 1.68 0.64 1.91 0.58

6 Ensuring that all examination takes off at the time in each examination centre.

1.74 0.72 1.72 0.71 1.85 0.78 1.74 0.70

7 Ensuring that examination papers are properly sealed and protected to prevent leakage before the examination.

2.00 0.81 1.98 0.78 2.03 0.97 2.04 0.81

8 Providing adequate answer scripts and examination papers before the examination.

1.81 0.88 1.80 0.83 1.79 1.09 2.00 0.95

9 Provision of enough security at each of the examination centres to ensure security and uninterrupted examination.

1.94 0.71 1.94 0.70 2.00 0.70 2.09 0.76

10 Proper checking of students before the examination to ensure that no foreign materials are with them.

1.88 0.62 1.92 0.63 1.76 0.61 1.90 0.59

Grand Means 18.56 18.66 18.17 19.28

The data analysis on Table I show that the respondents did not accept the strategies being

adopted as either very effective or effective for curbing pre-examination malpractice in public

examinations in Nigeria. All the adopted strategies were rated as slightly effective in curbing pre-

examination malpractices by the respondents. This was indicated by the range of the mean ratings

on the adopted strategies being less than or equal to 2.00. To substantiate this result, response to the

interview and focus group discussion are also shown below.

Table 2: Response to interview and focus group discussion on the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

Item Statements WAEC OFFICIAL

NECO OFFICIAL

STUDENTS DISCUSSION

NO of E NO of N/E

NO of E

NO of N/E

NO of E

NO of N/E

1 One of the strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractice is by registering students with e-passport so as to discourage impersonation. How effective is this strategy?

20%

5

80%

20

13%

2

87%

13

49%

49

51%

51

2 Provision of enough securities at each of the examination centres to ensure security and uninterrupted examinations is another strategy use to curb pre-examination malpractice. From your own point of view, how would you judge the effectiveness of this strategy?

8%

2

92%

23

13%

2

87%

13

34%

34

66%

66

3 To avoid leakage of examination question paper before the examination, question papers are properly sealed and well protected.How effected is this strategy?

4%

1

96%

24

-

0

100%

15

23%

23

77%

77

4 Another pre-examination strategy is ensuring that candidate is properly checked before they enter the examination halls. This is to ensure that no unauthorized materials are on them. What is your opinion about the effectiveness of this strategy?

4%

1

96%

24

20%

3

80%

12

31%

31

69%

69

The results presented in Table 2 show the percentage response of the effectiveness of the

strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractices in public examination. In general the

5 In summary, how would you rate the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractice?

*E= Effective,E=Not effective

24%

6

76%

19

20%

3

80%

12

21%

21

79%

79

percentage ratings showed that the respondents failed to accept the adopted strategies as effective

for curbing pre-examination malpractices. This is so as all their responses on effectiveness of the

strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice fall below 50%.

Research Question Two:

What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders with respect to

the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice?

Table 3: Mean ratings of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the

Strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice.

Item Strategies Students

_

X SD

Teachers

_

X SD

Principals

_

X SD

Parents

_

X SD

1 Appending signatures on all the scripts used by the students in an examination by the supervisors.

1.90 0.73 1.87 6.74 1.94 0.6 5 1.93 0.57

2 Ensuring that there is no faming out of question papers during the examination.

1.99 0.68 2.00 0.71 1.97 0.76 2.00 0.64

3 Ensuring that all answer scripts are collected by authorized person at the end of the examination

1.79 0.64 1.82 0.68 1.85 0.74 1.63 0.54

4 Handling over to the law enforcement agents any candidates caught cheating during examination.

1.91 0.76 1.88 0.80 1.97 0.76 1.80 0.75

5 Prohibiting the bringing into the examination hall all electronic devices (G.S.M, pagers etc) during an examination.

1.90 0.69 1.86 0.69 2.14 0.66 1.77 0.62

6 Provision of financial incentive for examination officals, invigilators etc who expose students indulging in examination malpractice during examination

1.81 0.77 1.81 0.81 1.79 0.73 1.84 0.83

7 Preventing individuals who are not registered candidates (external assistance) from assisting students during an examination.

2.04 0.82 1.93 0.79 2.77 0.83 1.77 0.75

8 Handling over the law enforcement agents, all those caught giving assistance to candidate during an examination.

1.84 0.90 1.76 0.83 1.74 0.71 1.50 0.63

9 Preventing candidates from giraffing during an examination.

1.99 0.73 1.93 0.72 2.03 0.76 1.80 0.60

10 Preventing the use of prepared materials during an examination.

1.97 0.68 1.94 0.70 2.15 0.66 1.71 0.59

Grand Mean 19.14 18.80 20.35 17.75

Results presented in Table 3 shows the respective score mean ratings of the education sector

stakeholders on the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice

during examinations. The stakeholders rated all the strategies adopted for curbing during

examination malpractice as slightly effective. This is because the mean ratings of all the

stakeholders on the items are less than 2.50. Below also showed the responses from the interview

and focus group discussion.

Table 4: Response to interview and focus group discussion on the effectives of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice.

Qst. Statements WAEC OFFICALS NECO OFFICALS STD DISCUSSION

No of

officials

NO of

E

NO of

N/E

No of

officials

NO of E

NO of

N/E

No of

officials

NO of

E

NO of

N/E

1 Appending signature on all the examination papers by the supervisor. This is to ensure that exams written outside the halls are not slipped in during examination. How effective is this strategy?

25 32%

8

68%

17

15 40%

6

60%

9

100 44%

44

66%

66

2 To ensure that examination malpractice is curbed, any students caught cheating should be handed over to law enforcement agents for further actions. What is your opinion on the effectives of this strategy?

25 24%

6

76%

19

15 33%

5

66%

10

100 23%

23

77%

77

3 As a strategy to curb examination malpractice, candidates are not allowed to giraffe during examination. What is your perception on the effectiveness of the strategy?

25 32%

8

68%

17

15 33%

5

66%

10

100 39%

39

61%

61

4 In order not to be influence financially by candidates indulging in examination malpractice, a provision of financial incentive has been made for examination officials, invigilators, etc who expose candidates indulging in examination malpractice during examination. what is your opinion about the effectives of this strategy?

25 12%

3

88%

22

15 13%

2

87%

13

100 22%

22

88%

88

5 In summary, how would you rate the effectiveness of the strategies adopted during examination malpractice?

25 36%

9

64%

16

15 26%

4

74%

11

100 18%

18

82%

82

*E= Effective, Effective.

The data analysis in Table 4 show the percentage responses from the interview and focus

group discussion on the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination

malpractice. In general the results showed that the respondents failed to accept all the strategies

adopted for curbing during examination malpractice as being effective. This was shown by their

percentage responses which fall below 50%.

Research Question Three

What are the mean ratings of the education sector stakeholders with respect to the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice?

Table 5: Mean ratings of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice.

Strategies Students

_

X SD

Teachers

_

X SD

Principals

_

X SD

Parents

_

X SD

1 Cancellation of entire results for mass malpractice in any examination centre.

1.71 0.64 1.86 0.64 1.74 0.45 1.70 0.69

2 Cancellation of candidate’s results if caught cheating.

1.93 0.64 1.94 0.64 1.88 0.59 2.03 0.66

3 Banning of schools involved in examination malpractice from writing external examinations.

1.69 0.57 1.72 0.59 1.74 0.45 1.69 0.53

4 Imprisonment of supervisors for aiding and abetting examination malpractice.

1.80 0.70 1.77 0.73 1.47 0.61 1.96 0.67

5 Jail terms for the agents involved in examination malpractice in various special centres.

1.78 0.68 1.82 0.62 1.76 0.55 1.69 0.68

6 Blacklisting of teachers involved in examination malpractice.

1.78 0.60 1.82 0.62 1.76 0.55 1.69 0.60

7 Embossment of photographs on candidate certificates to render the certificate useless in the case of impersonation.

1.87 0.76 1.89 0.73 1.79 0.73 2.06 0.92

8 Withholding of candidate’s results when examination is suspected for proper investigation.

1.72 0.80 1.61 0.70 1.50 0.51 1.89 0.97

9 Disqualification of answers written on papers other than the one provided for.

1.90 0.68 1.83 0.65 1.65 0.65 2.11 0.73

10 Remarking of examination scripts when examination malpractice is suspected.

1.86 0.62 1.86 0.64 1.74 0.62 1.84 0.61

Grand Mean 18.04 18.12 17.03 18.06

The data analysis in Table 5 shows the respective mean ratings of students, teachers,

principals and parents on the effectiveness of strategies adopted in curbing post-examination

malpractice. The result indicated that the stakeholders slightly accept that the strategies adopted for

curbing post- examination malpractice was effective, as their mean responses fall below within the

range of 1.50 and 2.49. To corroborate this result, responses from the interview and focus group

discussion are shown below.

Table 6: Responses to interview and focus group discussion on the effectives of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice.

*E= Effective, N/E= Not effective

The analysis in table 6 show the percentage responses from the interview and focus group

discussion on the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post- examination malpractice.

In general the result showed that the respondents failed to accept the strategies adopted for curbing

during examination malpractice as being effective. This was shown by their percentage responses

which fell below 50%, though 74 students and 9 NECO officials, representing 74% and 60%

respectively accepted that question 4 was an effective strategy.

Research Question four

Qst. Statements WAEC OFFICALS NECO OFFICALS STD DISCUSSION

No of

officials

NO of

E

NO of

N/E

No of

officials

NO of

E

NO of

N/E

No of officials

NO of

E

NO of

N/E

1 One of the strategies adopted to curb post- examination malpractice is cancelling entire centre results are candidate’s results, when there ere evidences of cheating. How effective is the strategy?

25 44%

11

56%

14

15 40%

6

60%

9

100 38%

38

62%

62

2 To also discourage examination malpractice, any school or examination centre involved in malpractice is banned from writing external examination. How effective is this strategy ?

25 28%

7

72%

18

15 33%

5

67%

10

100 41%

41

59%

59

3 Any teacher involved in examination is blacklisted what is your perception about the effectiveness of this strategy?

25 36%

9

64%

16

15 20%

3

80%

12

100 16%

16

84%

84

4 Another strategy adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice is embossment of photograph on candidate’s certificate. This renders the certificate useless in the case of impersonation. What is your opinion about the effectives of this strategy?

25 44%

11

56%

14

15 60%

9

40%

6

100 74%

74

26%

26

5 In a summarized form, how will you rate the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing post examination?

25 44%

11

56%

14

15 40%

6

60%

9

100 47%

47

53%

53

How does gender of the education sector stakeholders influence their mean ratings of the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice in public examinations?

Table 7a: Mean ratings by gender of education sector stakeholders of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

Item Strategies Gender N _

X SD

1 Enough personnel for supervision and invigilation of public examination.

Male

Female

467

533

1.82

1.79

0.66

0.62

2 Pasting fliers on the penalties of examination malpractice.

Male

Female

467

533

1.98

1.98

0.64

0.64

3 Registration e-passports. Male

Female

467

533

1.75

1.73

0.59

0.59

4 Syllabus within average difficulty level of the students.

Male

Female

467

533

1.88

1.84

0.70

0.70

5 Well remuneration of teachers, invigilators, and supervisors.

Male

Female

467

533

1.83

1.85

0.61

0.61

6 The same take off time on all examination centres.

Male

Female

467

533

1.76

1.72

0.72

0.71

7 Examination papers properly sealed.

Male

Female

467

533

2.03

1.98

0.83

0.78

8 Adequate answer scripts and examination papers.

Male

Female

467

533

1.84

1.79

0.91

0.86

9 Enough security at each of the examination centres.

Male

Female

467

533

1.99

1.92

0.73

0.69

10 Proper checking of students to ensure no unauthorized materials on them.

Male

Female

467

533

1.89

1.88

0.63

0.62

The analysis presented in Table 7a show that the male and female respondents rated the

adopted strategies for curbing pre-examination malpractices as slightly effective, as their mean

ratings fall between the range of 1.5 and 2.49 respectively.

Table 7b: Mean ratings according to gender on the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice.

Item Strategies Gender N _

X SD

1 Appending signatures on all the scripts used.

Male

Female

467

533

1.90

1.88

0.73

0.70

2 No faming out of question papers. Male

Female

467

533

1.99

1.99

0.71

0.66

3 Collection of answer scripts by authorized person.

Male

Female

467

533

1.77

1.80

0.64

0.65

4 Handling over to the police candidates caught cheating.

Male

Female

467

533

1.87

1.92

0.78

0.76

5 Prohibiting all electronic devices (G.S.M, pagers etc).

Male

Female

467

533

1.86

0.92

0.71

0.67

6 Provision of financial incentive for examination officials, invigilators etc.

Male

Female

467

533

1.81

1.82

0.80

0.76

7 Preventing individuals who are not registered candidates (external assistance).

Male

Female

467

533

1.97

2.64

0.83

0.81

8 Handling over to police external agents caught in the examination hall.

Male

Female

467

533

1.75

1.83

0.84

0.88

9 Preventing candidates from giraffing. Male

Female

467

533

1.91

2.02

0.76

0.74

10 Preventing the use of prepared materials.

Male

Female

467

533

1.94

1.96

0.70

0.67

The analysis presented in Table 7b show the respective mean ratings of the effectiveness of

the strategies for curbing during examination malpractices, according to gender of the education

stakeholders. The data showed that both the male and female respondents rated equally that the

adopted strategies for curbing during examination malpractice are slightly effective. This is so as

their mean ratings fall between 1.5 and 2.49 respectively.

Table 7c: Mean ratings by gender of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice.

Item Strategies Gender N _

X SD

1 Cancellation of entire results for mass malpractice.

Male

Female

467

533

1.69

1.80

0.63

0.65

2 Cancellation of candidate’s results for cheating.

Male

Female

467

533

1.92

1.95

0.64

0.64

3 Banning of schools involved in examination malpractice.

Male

Female

467

533

1.69

1.70

0.56

0.57

4 Imprisonment of supervisors for examination malpractice.

Male

Female

467

533

1.76

1.82

0.69

0.72

5 Jail terms for the agents involved in examination malpractice.

Male

Female

467

533

1.75

1.81

0.59

0.61

6 Blacklisting of teachers. Male

Female

467

533

1.69

1.72

0.69

0.72

7 Embossment of photographs on candidate certificates.

Male

Female

467

533

1.84

1.93

0.74

0.79

8 Withholding of candidate’s results. Male

Female

467

533

1.68

1.71

0.78

0.79

9 Disqualification of answer booklets. Male 467 1.88 0.69

Female 533 1.89 0.67

10 Remarking of examination scripts. Male

Female

467

533

1.83

1.88

0.62

0.63

The analysis in Table 7c show the mean rating scores of the strategies for curbing post-

examination malpractice according to gender of the stakeholders. The data indicated that both male

and female respondents rated the strategies as slightly effective, as their mean ratings fall within the

range of 1.5 and 2.49 respectively.

HYPOTHESES

Ho1: There would be no significant difference in the mean ratings of education sector stakeholders

with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

Table 8: One-way ANOVA of education sector stakeholders mean ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

Variable Sum of square df Mean square F Sig. Decision

Between-group 34.28 3 11.43 1.40 0.243 NS

Within-group 8161.32 996 8.19

Total 8165.60 999

N MEAN S.D

STUDENTS 646 18.5604 2.89591

TEACHERS 250 18.6680 2.72239

PRINCIPALS 34 18.1765 3.49433

PARENTS 70 19.2143 2.70208

TOTAL 1000 18.6200 2.86423

The result in Table 8 indicates that the F- value of 1.40 with a probability value of 0.243

was not significant at 0.05 hence, we fail to reject null hypotheses one. This imply that there was no

significant difference in the mean ratings of the different categories of education sector stakeholders

with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

Ho2: The mean rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would not differ

significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination

malpractice.

Table 9: Independent t-test analysis of male and female education sector stakeholders mean ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

variable N _

X SD df t Decision

Male 467 18.77 2.89 998 0.13 NS

Female 533 18.49 2.84

The analysis in Table 9 above show that the t-value of 0.13 is not significant at 0.05 level of

significance. As such, we fail to reject the null hypothesis which stated that the mean rating scores

of male and female education sector stakeholders would not differ significantly with respect to the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractice.

Ho3: There would be no significant difference in the mean perception ratings of education sector

stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during

examination malpractice.

Table 10a: One- way ANOVA of education sector stakeholders mean ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice.

Variable Sum of square df Mean square F Sig Decision

Between- group 165.423 3 55.141 5.562 0.001 S

Within-group 9874.093 996 9.914

Total 10039.516 999

N _

X S.D

STUDENTS 646 19.1223 3.07209

TEACHERS 250 18.8000 3.54433

PRINCIPALS 34 20.0588 2.59301

PARENTS 70 17.7571 2.51624

TOTAL 1000 18.9780 3.17010

The data analysis presented in Table 10a show that the F-value of 5.562 with a significant

level of 0.001 was significant at 0.05 probability level. Judging from the result of the data, we fail

to accept null hypotheses three. Hence, there was a significant difference in the mean ratings of the

strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice by the various education sector

stakeholders.

Table 10b: Post Hoc Multiple Comparison of the mean differences using Scheffe Method.

Stakeholders (I)

Stakeholders (J) Mean difference (J-I)

Sig. Decision

Students

Teachers

Principals

Parents

0.3223

-0.9365

1.3651

0.589

0.407

0.007

NS

NS

S

Teachers Students

Principals

Parents

-0.3223

-1.2588

1.0429

0.589

0.182

0.107

NS

NS

NS

Principals Students

teachers

Parents

0.9365

1.2588

2.3017

0.407

0.182

0.006

NS

NS

S

Parents

Students

Teachers

Principals

-1.3651

-1.0429

-2.3017

0.007

0.107

0.006

S

NS

S

From the post- hoc test above, the comparison between students, teachers, and parents

showed no significant difference; however, the comparison between students and parents indicated

a significant difference. These imply that there was significant difference in the mean ratings of

students and parents in favour of students as shown in their mean ratings difference. The

comparison between teachers, students, principals and parents indicated no significant difference.

The comparison between principals, students and teachers show no significant difference, while on

the other hand, the comparison between principals and parents show a significant difference. This

signifies that there was a significant difference in the mean ratings of principals and parents in

favour of principals as shown in their mean difference.

Ho4: The mean perception rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would

not differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing during

examination malpractice.

Table 11: Independent t-test analysis of male and female education sector stakeholders mean ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice.

Variable N _

X SD Df t Decision

Male 467 18.73 3.25 998 -2.10 S

Female 533 18.17 3.09

From Table 11, the t-value of -2.10 I is significant at 0.05 level of probability. Therefore,

we fail to accept the null hypothesis which stated that the mean perception rating scores of male and

female education sector stakeholders would not differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness

of the strategies adopted in curbing during examination malpractice.

Ho5: There will be no significant difference in the mean perception ratings of education sector

stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post examination

malpractice.

Table 12a: One- way ANOVA of education sector stakeholders mean ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post- examination malpractice.

Variable Sum of square df Mean square F Sig Decision

Between- group 95.45 3 31.82 4.57 0.003 S

Within-group 6933.26 996 6.96

Total 7028.71 999

N _

X S.D

STUDENTS 646 17.9443 2.61421

TEACHERS 250 18.0280 2.71897

PRINCIPALS 34 16.7647 2.10424

PARENTS 70 18.7714 2.79322

TOTAL 1000 17.9830 2.65250

The results of table 12a show that the F-value of 4.57 with a probability level of 0.003 was

significant at 0.05 level of significance, therefore we fail to accept null hypothesis five. This imply

that there was a significant difference in the mean ratings of the education sector stakeholders of the

effectiveness of strategies adopted for curbing post- examination malpractice.

Table 12b: Post Hoc Multiple Comparison of the mean differences using Scheffe Method.

Stakeholders (I)

Stakeholders (J) Mean difference

(I-J)

Sig. Decision

Students Teachers

Principals

Parents

-0.0837

1.1796

-0.8272

0.980

0.090

0.100

NS

NS

NS

Teachers Students 0.0837 0.980 NS

Principals

Parents

1.2633

-0.7434

0.075

0.224

NS

NS

Principals

Students

teachers

Parents

-1.1796

-1.2633

-2.0067

0.090

0.075

0.004

NS

NS

S

Parents Students

teachers

Principals

0.82716

0.74343

2.00672

0.100

0.224

0.004

NS

NS

S

From Table 12b above, the comparison between students, teachers, principals and parents

showed no significant difference. The comparison between teachers, students, principals and

parents also showed no significant difference. The comparison between principals, students and

teachers showed no significant difference, but the comparison between principals and parents

indicate a significant difference. These imply that there was a significant difference in the mean

ratings of principals and parents, in favour of parents. Lastly, the comparison between parents,

students and teachers indicated no significant difference, while the comparison between parents and

principals indicated a significant difference. These also imply that the mean ratings of parents and

principals differ significantly and in the favour of parents.

Ho6: The mean perception rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would

not differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-

examination malpractice.

Table 13: Independent t-test analysis of male and female education sector stakeholders mean ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post- examination malpractice.

Variable N _

X SD Df t Decision

Male 467 17.73 2.54 998 -2.88 S

Female 533 18.21 2.73

Table 13 show that t-value of -2.88 was significant at 0.05, hence, we fail to accept null

hypothesis six. This imply that the mean perception rating scores of male and female education

sector stakeholders would differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies

adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice.

Major Findings of the Study

Based on the analysis of data, the following major findings were made.

1. The various education sector stakeholders did not accept the strategies adopted for

curbing pre-examination malpractice as being effective as their mean ratings fall below

2.5.

2. The education sector stakeholders rated the strategies adopted for curbing during

examination malpractices as slightly effective.

3. The strategies adopted for curbing post- examination malpractice were also rated as

slightly effective by the stakeholders.

4. Both male and female education sector-stakeholders rated the strategies for curbing pre-

examination, during examination and post-examination malpractice as slightly effective

respectively.

5. There was no significant difference in the mean ratings of the education sector

stakeholders of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination

malpractice.

6. There was a significant difference in the mean ratings of the education sector

stakeholders of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during

examination malpractice.

7. There was a significant different in the mean ratings of the education sector stakeholders

of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice.

8. No significant difference was obtained in the mean ratings of male and female education

sector stakeholders of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-

examination malpractice.

9. There was a significant difference between the mean ratings of male and female

education sector stakeholders of the effectiveness of strategies adopted for curbing

during examination malpractice.

10. There was a significant difference between male and female respondents on the mean

ratings of the effectiveness of strategies adopted for curbing post- examination

malpractice.

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATION, RECOMMENDATION

AND SUMMARY

In this chapter, the research discusses the major findings of the study. Based on the findings,

major conclusions are drawn. Summary of the results was also discussed. The later part of the

chapter discusses the educational implication of the findings, limitations and summary of the study.

Discussion of Results

The discussion of results was presented in line with the research questions and hypotheses

as follow:

Research Question One

What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders (principals,

parents, teachers, and students) with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for

curbing pre-examination malpractice?

Results from the present study show that the respondents rated all the strategies adopted for

curbing pre-examination malpractice as slightly effective. The interview and focus group discussion

also revealed that 76% of WAEC officials, 80% of NECO officials and 79% of the students failed

to accept the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice was effective. To further

expatiate their views, some of the WAEC and NECO officials further explained that it is not

strategies that was the problem, but the human factors to implement it. The human factors, as

explained by the officials are so engrossed with corruption and greed that they persist on rendering

efforts made to curb pre-examination malpractice fruitless. This of course is not surprising, as this

finding was in consonance with the study carried out by Aminu (2006) and Idahosa (2004), which

reported that greed for money, is one of the reasons while principals, teachers, invigilators,

supervisors and other agents indulged in examination malpractice are not willing to refrain from it.

Research Question Two

What are the mean perception ratings of education sector stakeholders with respect to the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination malpractice?

Based on the result obtain in this study, the respondents rated the strategies as slightly

effective. The interview and focus group response revealed that the strategies for curbing during

examination malpractice are not effective. Further explanation by WAEC and NECO officials also

revealed that the problem was not the strategies or the inadequacy of the Act governing examination

malpractice matters, but the lack of proper implementation of the provision, as most officials in

charge of implementation are defaulting in their responsibilities. This statement is in line with that

of Uwadiae (2003), who reported that one of the reasons why examination malpractice persists is

because the 1999 examination malpractice Act has not been implemented to the letter. The author

went further to say that those charged to implement these strategies are unlikely to support tough

measures as stated in the Act to promote the integrity of the examination system. From observation,

many culprits during examination, handed over to the police, were release after unofficial

negotiation with the police and this encourages one to be involved in examination malpractice.

Research Question Three

What are the mean perception ratings of education sector stakeholders with respect to the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice?

The data obtained from this study show that the respondents slightly accept the strategies

adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice as effective. The response to the interview and

focus group discussion, revealed that NECO officials and students accept that embossment of

photograph on candidates’ results to render the certificates useless in the case of impersonation is

effective. In summary, all the respondents upheld the view that the strategies adopted for curbing

post-examination malpractice, are ineffective as their response ratings fall below 50%.

Further expatiating on short comings of the strategies, WAEC officials, NECO officials, as

well as some of the students stated that some of the reasons why the strategies are not effective was

because the Nigeria society of present day celebrate those who are excelling without finding out the

means of achievement, emphasis are place on certificates and good grades to get job, and admission

for further studies without taking cognizant of skill development. This of course could cause

students who feel do not perform well during examination, to indulge in post examination

malpractice before the results will be finally released. This finding is in agreement with that of

Ojeikere (2004) who stated that one of the reasons for persistent examination malpractice is because

the society places exceptionally on goal achievement without a corresponding emphasis on

institutionalized means of achieving those goals. The author went further to explain that this exert

pressure on some students and may eventually resort to the use of any technically expedient means

in achieving thee goals irrespective of whether the means employed are legitimate or not. Also

related to this ,are the studies carried out by Onyechere (2004) and Omonijo (2010) who identified

emphasis placed on certificate and good grades as criteria for securing employment in Nigeria as

one of the reasons for persistence in examination malpractice.

From observation, current state of job employment in Nigeria, emphasis certificates more

than skill for employment. For instance, almost every advert for employment requires not less than

second class upper division. This eventually will lead to the quest for any means of obtaining better

certificates through fair or foul means (malpractice).

Research Question Four

How does the gender of education sector stakeholders influence their mean perception

ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination

malpractice in public examinations?

Result from the study show that the mean ratings of both male and female respondents with

respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination strategies, during

examination strategies and post-examination strategies are relatively equal. This study was related

to the findings of Badejo and Gandonu (2001) that gender has no indices for examination in

malpractice. For observation the level of participation of both male and female in examination

malpractice do not seem to vary from each other as both gender are involved in malpractice not

withstanding the gender they belonged.

Findings on the Six Null Hypotheses of the Study

Ho1: There would be no significant difference in the mean ratings of education sector stakeholders

with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

The finding regarding to hypothesis one show that there was no significant difference in the

mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the

strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice in public examination. This means that

the education sector stakeholders have the same perception of the effectiveness or otherwise of the

strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice. From observation, this could be from

the societal comments on the level of examination malpractice which they feel is unabated.

Ho2: The mean ratings scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would not differ

significant with respect to the effectiveness strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination

malpractice in public examination.

The result obtained for the study reveal that the mean rating scores of male and female

education sector stakeholders differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies

adopted for curbing pre- examination malpractice. This imply that both male and female education

sector stakeholders view with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-

examination malpractice are the same.

H03: There would be no significant difference in the mean ratings of education sector stakeholders

with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination

malpractice in public examination.

The finding as regards to hypothesis four show that there was a significant difference in the

mean perception ratings of the various education sector stakeholders with respect to the

effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during examination strategies. As such, the null

hypothesis was rejected. The researcher carried out a post-hoc test since the null hypothesis was

significant. This was done so as the find out the exact mean difference of the various stakeholders

that resulted in the null hypothesis to be significant.

From the post-hoc test, the direction of the mean significant difference show that the

comparison between students and parents; principals and parents; parents, students and principals

indicate a significant difference. On the other hand, the comparison between students, teachers and

principals; teachers, students, principals and parents; principals, students and teachers; parents and

teachers indicate significant difference. This imply that there are variations in the mean perception

ratings of the compared groups that have a significant difference, while no variations in the mean

perception ratings of the compared groups that are not significant.

Ho4: The mean perception rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would

not differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing during

examination malpractice in public examinations.

The result from the analysis show that the mean ratings scores of male and female education

sector stakeholders differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for

curbing during examination malpractice in public examination. This implies that male and female

respondents have different views of the effectiveness of the adopted strategies for curbing during

examination malpractice.

Ho5: There would be no significant difference in the mean ratings of education sector stakeholders

with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-examination malpractice

in public examinations.

The findings obtain in this study showed that there was a significant difference in the mean

perception ratings of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies

adopted in curbing post-examination malpractice in public examinations. Therefore, the hypothesis

was also rejected. The researcher also carried out a post-hoc analysis since the third null hypothesis

of the study was significant. Result from the post-hoc reveal that, the comparison between students,

teachers, principals and parents; the comparison between teachers, students, principals and parents;

principals, students and teachers, parents, students and teachers indicate no significant difference in

their mean ratings. On the other hand, the comparison between principals and parents indicate a

significant difference. This imply that the comparison of the groups that are not significant revealed

no variation in their mean ratings, while the groups that are significant revealed variation in their

mean perception ratings.

Ho6: The mean perception rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders would

not differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post-

examination malpractice in public examinations.

The result reveal that the mean perception rating scores of male and female education sector

stakeholders differ significantly, with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for

curbing post-examination malpractice. This infer that there was a variation in the perceptions of

male from female with respect to the effectiveness of the adopted strategies for curbing post-

examination malpractice are not the same.

Conclusion

On the basis of the major findings of this study, the following conclusions were made. The

stakeholders’ perception of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination

malpractices in public examinations in Nigeria has been determined in this study. The stakeholders’

perceptions were ascertained at three different levels of examination malpractices (pre-examination,

during examination and post-examination). The effectiveness of the strategies adopted by the

various levels was rated by the education sector stakeholders (parents, teachers, students and

principals) and the findings show that:

1. The education sector stakeholders failed to accept the strategies for curbing examination

malpractice as being effective. The stakeholders rated the strategies for curbing pre-

examination, during examination, and post examination malpractice strategies as slightly

effective respectively.

2. Both male and female education sector stakeholders rate the strategies for curbing

examination malpractice as slightly effective. No significant difference was obtained in the

mean ratings of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination

malpractice.

3. There was however a significant difference at 0.05 levels between male and female

respondents means ratings of the effectiveness of strategies adopted for curbing during

examination and post-examination malpractice.

4. In all, there was a significant difference in the mean ratings of effectiveness of strategies

adopted for curbing during and post examination malpractice. However, there was no

significant different in the ratings of the various stakeholders on the effectiveness of

strategies adopted for curbing pre-examination malpractice.

Educational Implications of the Study

The evidence obtained in this study, formed the basis for the following implications:

(1) The findings of this study which showed that the strategies adopted for curbing pre-

examination malpractice were slightly effective. The implication was that examination

malpractice in public exams in Nigeria may seem to continue if the pre-exam strategies are

not straightens.

(2) The findings of the study shows that the strategies adopted for curbing during examination

malpractice were also rated slightly effective. The implication of this finding is that it can

have influence on the reading habit of candidates preparing for public examination in

Nigeria. For instance when the candidate is doubtful of the strategies been adopted in

checking during examination malpractice, they less prepare for the examination, but attempt

various modes of examination malpractice towards making good results.

(3) The findings also show that the strategies adopted for curbing post examination malpractice

were rated slightly effective. The implication of the findings of the study is that admission

into higher institutions of learning in Nigeria may not be for the intelligent students. This is

because through examination malpractice, academically poor students may get admitted into

these institutions.

(4) Following, from above, the other implication is the displacement of the more academically

qualified candidates by the qualified ones through examination malpractice.

(5) The other implication of the finding is that teachers may not be committed adequately to

their jobs as they feel that students’ performance is not a measure of their efforts, since less

prepared candidates may perform better than those candidates who were adequately

prepared by the teacher.

(6) Another far- reaching implication of the study is the lowering of standard of education

system. If examination malpractice becomes the order of the day, then little or no efforts is

required for certificate, hence graduates of less or no substance may be produced from

educational institutions.

Limitations of the Study

The findings and conclusions revealed in this study may be constrained to the following

limitations:

1) The sample size of the study was relatively small compared to the entire population.

2) Administration to the teachers posed a great problem to the researcher. To overcome this

threat, the researcher used the vice principals to help in the dispatching of the

questionnaires to the teachers.

3) The respondents, especially the teachers might fake their responses to some of the

statements, as most of them felt reluctant to fill the questions. This may have distorted

the findings.

4) The six geographical zones of the country would have been used so as to take care of

cultural background of all Nigerians and as such, the findings may not be generalized to

Nigeria population.

Suggestions for further studies

1 Population of this study is suggested to cover the six geographical zones of Nigeria so as

to reflect the cultural background of the respondents.

2 A replication of this study involving a larger sample is suggested in another state.

Recommendations

On the basis of the findings and implications of the study, these recommendations are made:

1. The adopted strategies for cubing examination malpractice should be improved by

identifying more effective strategies.

2. The government should enforce the Act on examination malpractice to ensure that culprits

are punished as spelt out in the Act.

3. The management of examination by invigilators and supervisors should be made more

effective.

4. There should be adequate preparation of students for the examination by the subject

teachers.

5. Poor handling of examination materials by custodians should be properly readdressed.

6. There should be a proactive and periodic guidance and counseling of students on the ills of

examination malpractice and how to avoid such practices.

7. Teachers’ welfare should be improved so that they will teach conscientiously in the hope of

producing more scholarly students, who will not be interested in examination malpractice.

REFERENCES

Adebayo , S.O. (2002). Students perception of the role of parents in academic and

continued examination malpractice. Academic Journals and Books. Retrieve

March 11, 2011 from http://www.aeaafrican.org.

Adegboye, A. (1998). Examination malpractice in Nigeria tertiary institutions: problems and solution. Retrieve March 11, 2011, from http://www.madonnauniveristy.edu.ng/portal/adminx/academics/reserach-uploads/res.14.

Adeyegbe, M. (1994). Teachers falsify continuous assessment marks. Journal of the Association for Educational Assessment in African, 1 (4), 13 -33.

Afolabi, (1998). Validity of public examination, the environment and sustainable development: Book of readings on education environment and sustainable national development. Ife: Cardinal Crest Ltd.

Ahmed, B.U. (1996). Trends in examination malpractice: A statistical analysis. Paper presented at the national Conference on examination ethics, Abuja. Retrieved March 11, 2011, from http://www.academic journals.org/ijpc/pdf/.

Akpa, G.O. (2002). The 21st century principals in Nigeria. Retrieved July 21, 2011, from http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/publications.htm.

Alutu, A.N.G.; & Aluede, .O. (2006). Secondary school students’ perception of examination malpractices and examination ethics. Retrieved February 14, 2011, from http://www.krepublisher.co/o2-journals/IJES/.

Aminu, J. (2006). Examination in Nigeria: Roots, sustenance, endemicity, danger and assasilance. Key note address delivered in a two-day submit on examination malpractice in Abuja; August 15-16, 2006.

Badejo, A.O & Gandonu, M.G. (2001). Predisposing factors towards examination malpractice among students in Lagos university: Implication for counseling. Retrieve June 18, 2011, from http.//www.naero.org|index.php|naero-journey|.

Badmus, G.A. (2006). Accountability in teaching/learning environment and examination malpractice. A paper presented at a two-day summit on Examination in Nigeria. Abuja, August 15-16, 2006.

Balogun, J.O. (1999). Examination malpractices and the society. The Jos Journal of Education. 4(8), 24-29.

Bassey, E.O., Bessong, F.E., Onete, U.O., Etim, C., & Achigbe, M.O. (2010). An investigation into the forces behind examination malpractices in Nigeria: A challenge for secondary school education in the new millennium. Journal of Education Assessment in African, 4, 33-44.

Bunza, M.M. (1997). The role of teachers in promoting Ethics. In conference proceeding organized by Federal Ministry of Education in collaboration with Exam Ethics project. Yaba: NERDC Press.

Chuta , E.J. (1995). Money syndrome. Paper presented at the 10th congress of the Nigeria Academy of Education at Abuja, November 9, 1995.

Denga, D.I. (1993). Education at a glance: From cradle to tomb. Calabar: REP Ltd.

Ene, O.C. & Ursula C.N. (1998). Strategies for effective conduct for examination in tertiary institution in Enugu State. Ife: Cardinal Crest ltd.

Esere, M.O. & Arewah, M.C.O. (2000). Youth and adolescent programems: The challenges for counseling. Retrieved June 30, 2011, from http://www.academic journals.org/ijpc/pdf/.

Eze, U.N. (2002). The Nigerian learning environment: A hindrance to the introduction of the new information technology in schools. International Journal of Arts and Technology Education 1(3), 45-55.

Fagbemi, A. (1998). Assessment and education malpractice. Proceeding of the 16th annual. Congress of the Nigeria Academy of Education held in the University of Jos, November 12-16.

Fayombo, G.A. (2004). Assuring quality in school practices and strategies. 1st National Conference of the Institute of Education, Olabisi Onabanjo University Conference Proceedings, p. 160-167.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999). Examination malpractice Act. Lagos: Government Press.

Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.

Idahosa, M.C. (2004). Perceived causes of malpractice in public examinations by fresh students of St. Augustine’s college of Education,Akoka Lagos. Retrieved June 30, 2011, from http://www.academicjournals.org/IJPC/pdf/.

Ijaiya, N.Y.S. (2004). Agents of examination malpractice in Nigeria’s public examinations: Who is the strongest link? Paper presented at the 7th National Conference of the National Association of Educational Researchers and Evaluators. (NAERE) held at University of Lagos. June 21-24, 2004.

Ijaiya, Y. (2001). From quality control to quality assurance: A panacea for quality education in Nigeria schools. Benin City: Nigeria Association for Educational Administration and Planning.

Jimoh, B.O. (2009). Examination malpractice in secondary schools in Nigeria: what sustain it? Retrieved July 30, 2011, from http://ozelacademy.com|EJESVIN3

Joshua, M.T. (2008). Examination malpractice: The monster in our midst. Paper presented at Intervention workshop for Teachers of English Language. Mathematics and Science subjects in Akwa Ibom State held in September – November.

Joshua, M.T., Obo, F.E., Joshua, A.M., Edet, A.O., & Ekpoh, U.I. (2010). Perception of examination malpractice, and intervention strategies by some stakeholders in the Nigerian school system. Journal of Educational Assessment in Africa, 4, 255-268.

Lobel, T.E, & Levanon, I. (1998). Gender difference in adolsescents’ cheating behaviour. Retrieved May 17, 2011, from http://www.academicjournals.org/ijpc/pdf/

Leming, J.S. (1990). Cheating behaviour, subject variables and components of the internal-external scale under high and low risk condition. Retrieved April 20, 2011 ,from http://www.academicjournals.org/ijpc/pdf/.

Maduka, C. (1993). Examination malpractice: Cause, implications and remedies. Benin city: Amik Press.

Maduabum, M.A; & Maduabum, C. I. (1998). Examination malpractice and standards:Reflection on society, institution and teacher-related factors. Ankpa: Cuca Communications Ltd.

Makoju, G.E., Adewale, A., Nwangwu, R., & Shuaibu, M.J. (2004). Examination malpractice and Federal Republic of Nigeria Development. Retrieve May 17, 2011 from http://www.academicjournals.org/IJPC/pdf/.

Moser, C. (1993). Gender and development: Theory, practice and training. London:Routledge.

Nenty, H.J. (2001). Tendency to cheat during mathematics examination and some achievement related variables. Paper presented at the WAEC monthly seminar, Univeristy of Lagos. Aug 13, 2001.

Nwadiani, M. (2005). Curbing examination malpractice in Nigeria education system. A lead paper presented at the first Annual Conference of the Faculty of Education, Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma. November 10-12.

Nworgu, B.G. (2006). Educational research: Basic Issues and methodology, (2nd ed). Nsukka: University Trust Publishers.

Obo, F.E. (2008). Education stakeholders’ attitudes towards examination malpractice and their preferred intervention strategies in Cross River State secondary schools system, Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation). University of Calabar, Cross River State.

Odongbo, D.N. (2002). Controlling examination malpractice and irregularities; Uganda National Examination Board’s Experience. Retrieved June 14, 2010 from http://www.madonnauniveristy.edu.ng/portal/adminx/academics/reserach-uploads/res14.

Ogunsaju, S.A. (1999). Examination malpractice? Bane of the youth. Illorin: Decency.

Ojeikere, M.B. (2004). Examination activities in Nigeria: Victims of social vices. Paper delivered at the WAEC monthly seminar, September 10, 2004.

Okwu, O.J. (2006). A critique of students’ vices and the effect on quality of graduate of Nigeria’s tertiary institutions. Retrieved October 16, 2010 from http://www.lerepublishers.com/02 - Journal.

Oladunni, M.O. (1995). Examination malpractices in tertiary institutions: Ondo State college of Education, Ikere-Ekiti experiences. A paper presented at the in-house seminar on examination malpractices held at the Ondo State College of Education, Ikere-Ekiti, January 26-27.

Olanipekun N.O. (2003). Examination malpractice in Nigeria schools: An in-depth analysis. Offa: Supreme Printing Press.

Olasehinde- Williams, F.A.O, Abdullahi, O.E & Owolabi, H.O. (2003). Relationship between background variebles and cheating tendencies among students of a federal university in Nigeria. Retrived July 19, 2011 from http://www.unillorin.edu.ng|journals|education|nijef.

Olatoye, R.A. (2006). Checking the menace of examination malpractice: A call for more teaching and learning in schools. Retrieved October 15, 2010 from http://www.naere.org/journal/volums,/nco.1.

Oluwatelure, F.A. (2008). Perception of academic intergrity violation and examination issues by selected members of the university community. Pakistan Journal of Social science, 5 (7), 680-690.

Oluwatelure, F. A. (2004). Psychological strategies for combating examination malpractices. Journal of Sustainable Development, 2(2), 1–7.

Omonijo, D.O. (2010). Parental influence on wards in escalation of examination misconduct in Nigeria. European Journal of Social Sciences 19 (2), 297-309.

Omotere, T. (2010). Age, Sex, and Test anxiety as a predictor of examination malpractice among secondary school student. Retrieved June 18, from http://www.egoboosterbooks.files.wordpress.com.

Onyechere, I. (1996). Examination ethic handbook. Lagos: Examination Ethics project.

Onyechere, I. (2004). Cheating: A world-wide problem: Come in at least 33 ways. Retrieved May 17, 2010, from http://www.allafrica.com.

Onyechere, I. (2008). Examination fraud. Retrieved June 18, 2011 from http://www.egoboosterbooks.files.wordpress.com.

Orbih, F.O. (2006). Confronting legal issues in examination malpractice. A paper presented at a two-day summit on Examination malpractice in Nigeria. Abuja, August 15-16, 2006.

Oredein, A.O. (2004). Checking examination malpractice in Nigeria Schools. Nigeria Journal of Education research and evaluation, 5 (1), 1-12.

Ossai, M.C. (2010). Study habit predicts examination behavior: An implication for enhancing quality of college guidance and counseling. Retrieved June 18, 2011 from http://www.egoboosterbooks.files.wordpress.com.

Salami, B.A. (1998). Examination malpractice and the integrity of education credentials. Paper presented at the 12th Annual conference of the Association for Educational Assessment in Africa (AEAA) September 19-21, Accra, Ghana.

Samuel, A. (2003). Way out of examination malpractice. Retrieved November 30, 2010 from http://www.academicjournals.org/IJPC/pdf/.

Sonnie, E. (2004). JAMB and examination malpractice. Lagos: NERDC press.

Sooze, S. (2004). Way out of examination malpractice. Retrieved June 30, 2010 from http://www.academicjournals.org/IJPC/pdf/.

Spearman, B. (1904). Classical Test Theory. Retrieved from April 20, 2011 from http://www.academicjournals.org/ijpc/pdf/

Taraban, R. (2004). Confirming factor analysis. Retrieved July 19, 2011 from http://www.cognitivessolutionsc.com|metacogread.

The West African Examinations Council (2006). Examinations. Retrieved June 30, 2010 from http://www.waecheadquartersgh.org/Exams.html.

Umar, T.U. (2003). The proliferation of examination malpractice: Need to halt examination fraud. Retrieved June 30, 2010 from http://www.educationresearch.com.

Uwadiae, I. (2003). Passing examination with moral integrity: A critical appraisal of students’ activities at secondary schools. A paper delivered on vice Educations at church seminar. December 13, 2003.

Uwadiae, I. (2005). Changing the trends of poor performance of candidates in the West Africa senior school certificate Examination. Retrieved June 30, 2010 from http://www.academicleadership.org/article./

Vanguard (2004). Education: Exams malpractice now multi-billion naira business. Retrieved March 16, 2011 from http://www.vanguardng.com .

West African Examination Council Forum (2003). Students Tricks in Examination. Lagos: WAEC.

World Bank (2001). Administration public examination system. Retrieved December 15, 2010 from http://www.worldbank.org/education.exam.

World Bank (2002). The Nature of public examination: Public Examination System. Retrieved December 15, 2010 from http://www.worldbank.org.education/exam.

APPENDIX I

TABL 1: POPULATION OF SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOLS, PRINCIPALS, TEACHERS AND STUDENTS IN THE 25 LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREAS.

SN LGA

NO OF SNR SCH.

NO OF SNR PRINC.

NO OF SNR TEAC.

NO OF SNR STD

1 Aniocha North 16 16 153 2751

2 Aniocha South 17 17 173 3751

3 Bomadi 8 8 36 950

4 Burutu 16 16 52 3267

5 Ethiope East 21 21 212 3191

6 Ethiope West 11 11 107 4702

7 Ika North East 17 17 383 916

8 Ika South 16 16 323 3683

9 Isoko North 16 16 142 2967

10 Isoko South 17 17 143 3255

11 Ndokwa East 19 19 76 2035

12 Ndokwa West 18 18 138 1633

13 Okpe 13 13 127 2123

14 Oshimili North 9 9 145 2981

15 Oshimili South 10 10 308 7850

16 Patani 8 8 40 773

17 Sapele 13 13 296 5092

18 Udu 9 9 129 3879

19 Ughelli North 30 30 443 12653

20 Ughelli South 17 17 168 3326

21 Ukwuani 13 13 172 2832

22 Uvwie 8 8 270 4716

23 Warri North 4 4 28 814

24 Warri South 13 13 403 7918

25 Warri South West 3 3 36 360

342 342 4503 87418 SOURCE: DELTA STATE POST PRIMARY EDUCATION BOARD, ASABA.

APPENDIX II

DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLED SCHOOLS.

DELTA NORTH

Oshimili South LGA:

1. Asagba senior mixed secondary school, Asaba. 2. Oko senior mixed secondary school, Asaba. 3. Basic secondary school (Zappa), Asaba.

Ika South LGA:

1. Ime-Obi Secondary School, Agbor.

2. Ogbemudein senior secondary school, Agbor.

3. Ihu- iyase senior secondary school , Agbor.

4. Omumu senior secondary school, Omumu.

Ukwuani LGA:

1. Senior secondary school, Ebedei. 2. Mixed senior secondary school, Akoku- Ebeodei. 3. Obiaruku senior grammer school, Obiaruku.

Aniocha South LGA:

1. Comprehensive senior seconday school, Ashama. 2. Azagba secondary school, Azagba. 3. Ubulu- unor mixed senior secondary school, Ubulu-unor. 4. Adangbo senior secondary school, Ugwashi-uku. 5. Egbudu mixed senior secondary school, Egbudu- Akah.

DELTA SOUTH

Warri South LGA:

1. Delta senior secondary school, Warri.

2. Uwangue senior secondary school, Warri. 3. Essi senior college, Warri.

Warri South West LGA:

1. Ogidigben senior grammer school, Ogidigben.

Isoko North LGA:

1. Emevor senior model school, Emevor. 2. Emo- Eni senior secondary school, Emevor. 3. Owhe senior secondary school, Otor- Owhe. 4. Ovrode senior secondary school, Ovrode.

DELTA CENTRAL

Ethiope East LGA:

1. Abraka senior grammer School, Abraka. 2. Urhuoka senior secondary school, Abraka. 3. Umiaghwa Secondary School,Oria-Abraka. 4. Otorho Secondary School Otorho, Abraka. 5. Kokori senior secondary school, Kokori. 6. Agbon senior secondary school,Isiokolo.

Uvwie LGA:

1. Ekpan senior secondary school, Ekpan. 2. Ogbe Secondary School, Effurun.

Sapele LGA:

1. Ufuoma mixed secondary school, Sapele. 2. Ethiope mixed senior secondary school, Sapele. 3. Orodje senior grammer school, Sapele.

APPENDIX III

Table 2: Distribution of Subjects in Sample School According to L.G.A.

LGA Schools Principals Teachers Students Parents Total

Ethiope East

21(6) 6 212(22) 3191(49) 5 82

Sapele 13(3) 3 296(31) 5092(78) 9 121

Uvwie 8(2) 2 270(28) 4716(72) 8 110

Oshimili south

10(3) 3 308(32) 7859(120) 12 167

Aniocha 17(5) 5 173(18) 3751(57) 6 86

Ukwuani 13(3) 3 172(18) 2832(42) 5 68

Ika South 16(4) 4 383(40) 3683(56) 6 106

Warri South

13(3) 3 403(42) 7918(121) 12 178

Isoko 16(4) 4 142(15) 2967(45) 5 69

Warri South West

3(1) 1 36(4) 360(6) 2 13

Total 34 34 250 646 70 1000

APPENDIX IV

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

TOPIC: STAKEHOLDERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE

STRATEGIES ADOPTED IN CURBING EXAMINATION

MALPRACTICE IN PUBLIC EXAMINATIONS IN NIGERIA.

INTERVIEWER: UCHEKWE J.O

DATE:

START:

END:

INTRODUCTION:

CLUSTER 1: PRE- EXAMINATION MALPRACTICE

QUESTION 1: One of the strategies adopted in curbing pre- examination

malpractice is by registering students with e- passport so as to discourage

impersonation. How effective is this strategy?

QUESTION 2: Provision of enough securities at each of the examination centers to

ensure security and uninterrupted examinations is another strategy use to curb pre-

examination malpractice. From your own point of view, how would you judge the

effectiveness of this strategy?

QUESTION 3: To avoid leakage of examination question paper before the

examination, question papers are properly sealed and well protected. How effective

is this strategies?

QUESTION 4: Another pre- examination strategy is, ensuring that candidates are

properly checked before they enter the examination halls. This is to ensure that no

unauthorized materials are on them. What is your opinion about the effectiveness of

this strategy adopted?

QUESTION 5: In summary, how would you rate the effectiveness of the strategies

adopted in curbing pre- examination malpractice?

CLUSTER II: DURING EXAMINATION STRATEGIES.

QUESTION 1: Appending signature on all the examination scripts used by the

students during examination by the supervisor. This is to ensure that exams written

outside the halls are not slipped in, is one of the strategies adopted in curbing during

examination malpractice. How effective is this strategy?

QUESTION 2: To ensure that examination malpractice is curbed, any students

caught cheating should be handed over to law enforcement agents for further

actions. What is your opinion on the effectiveness of this strategy?

QUESTION 3: as a strategy to curb examination malpractice, candidates are not

allowed to giraffe during an examination. What is your perception on the

effectiveness of this strategy?

QUESTION 4: In other not to be influence financially by candidates indulging in

examination malpractice, a provision of financial incentive have been made for

examination officials, invigilators e.t.c who expose candidates indulging in

examination malpractice during an examination. What is your opinion about the

effectiveness of this strategy?

QUESTION 5: In summary, how would you rate the effectiveness of the strategies

adopted in curbing during examination malpractice?

CLUSTER III: POST- EXAMINATION STRATEGIES .

QUESTION 1: one of the strategies to curb examination malpractice is the

cancellation of entire centre results or candidate’s results, when there are evidences

of cheating. How effective is this strategy?

QUESTION 2: To also discourage examination malpractice, any school or

examination centre involved in malpractice is banned from writing external

examination. What is your perception about the effectiveness of this strategy?

QUESTION 3: Any teacher involved in examination malpractice is blacklisted.

How effective is this strategy?

QUESTION 4: Another strategy adopted to curb post- examination malpractice is

embossment of photograph on candidate’s certificate. This strategy is adopted to

render the certificate useless in the case of impersonation. What is your perception

on the effective of this strategy?

QUESTION 5: In a summarized form, how will you rate the effectiveness of the

strategies adopted in curbing post- examination malpractice?

APPENDIX V

Department of Science Education,

Faculty of Education,

University of Nigeria,

Nsukka.

Sir,

REQUEST FOR FACE VALIDATION OF INSTRUMENT.

I am a post graduate student of the above department, currently working on the topic ‘Stakeholders Perception of the Strategies Adopted in Curbing Examination Malpractice in Public Examinations’.

With due respect, I want you to assist me to validate the instrument, (Stakeholders Perceptions of the Effectiveness of the Strategies for Curbing Examination Malpractice Questionnaire) by checking:

(1) The appropriateness of the language used. (2) Clarity of statements. (3) Relevance to the research questions and hypotheses.

For proper validation of the instrument, the research questions and hypotheses are reproduced below for your guidance.

Research Questions

The following research questions are posed to serve as a guide to the study:

(1) What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders (principals, parents, teachers, and students) with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing pre- examination malpractice?

(2) What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders (principals, parents, teachers, and students) with respect to the effectiveness of

the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice during examinations?

(3) What are the mean perception ratings of the education sector stakeholders (principals, parents, teachers, and students) with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing post examination malpractice?

(4) What are the mean perception ratings of the different categories of education sector stakeholders (principals, parents, teachers, and students) with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice in public examinations?

(5) How does the gender of the education sector stakeholders influence their mean perception ratings with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted for curbing examination malpractice in public examinations?

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses will guide the study and will be tested at 0.05 level of significance.

Ho1: There will be no significant difference in the mean perception ratings of the four categories of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractice.

H02: There will be no significant difference in the mean perception ratings of the four categories of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing malpractice during examination.

H03: There will be no significant difference in the mean perception ratings of the four categories of education sector stakeholders with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing post-examination malpractice.

H04: The mean perception rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders will not differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractice.

H05: The mean perception rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders will not differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing examination malpractice during examination.

H06: The mean perception rating scores of male and female education sector stakeholders will not differ significantly with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing post-examination malpractice.

H07: There will be no significant interaction effect between the mean perceptions of the four categories of education sector stakeholders and their gender with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractice.

H08: There will be no significant interaction effect between the mean perceptions of the four categories of education sector stakeholders and their gender with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing examination malpractice during examination.

H09: There will be no significant interaction effect between the mean perceptions of the four categories of education sector stakeholders and their gender with respect to the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing post-examination malpractice.

Please also comment on the adequacy of the instrument and suggest possible ways of improving it.

I place on record my best regards.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Uchekwe Joy .O.

APPENDIX VI

Department of Science Education,

Faculty of Education,

University of Nigeria,

Nsukka.

Dear Respondent,

REQUEST FOR RESPONSE ON STAKEHOLDERS PERCEPTIONS OF

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE STRATEGIES FOR CURBING

EXAMINATION MALPRACTICE QUESTIONNAIRE (SPESCEMQ).

I am a post graduate student of the above University, currently investigating

“Stakeholders perception of the effectiveness of the strategies adopted in curbing

examination malpractice in public examinations”.

The instrument (SPESCEMQ) is intended to provide information on how

effective are the strategies adopted in curbing pre- examination, during the

examination, and post- examination malpractices in public examinations. Please be

honest as your response will be treated anonymously.

Thanking you in advance for your co-operation.

Yours faithfully,

Uchekwe .O. Joy.

PART 1

PERSONAL DATA

INSTRUCTION: - Please tick � as the response that best describe you.

1. Sex: (a) male (b) female �

2. Status: Principal

Teacher

Parent

Student

PART 2

Instruction: please kindly use the following scale to indicate your perception of the effectiveness

of the existing strategies for curbing pre- examination, during the examination, and post –

examination malpractices. Tick (�) the response appropriate to you. You may either use pen or

pencil.

N/B : V.E= Very Effective, E=Effective, S.E=Slightly Effective, N.E= Not Effective

Cluster 1: Strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractices.

S/N Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Availability of examination syllabuses ahead of time.

2 Appointment of supervisors early enough before the examination.

3 Provision of adequate mobility for supervisors by examination bodies.

4 Preventing unauthorized external candidates from registering for any public examination.

5 Organizing enlightenment campaigns for students and teachers on examination malpractice and their penalties before the examination.

6 Ensuring adequate coverage of the examination syllabuses by the teachers before the examination due date.

7 Providing enough personnel for supervision and invigilation of public examination.

8 Pasting fliers on the penalties of examination malpractice at all examination centres.

9 Registration of students with their e- passports.

10 Ensuring that examination questions are within the syllabus and of average difficulty level of the students.

11 Ensuring that teachers, invigilators, and supervisors are well remunerated to guard against involvement in malpractice.

12 Proper monitoring of the enrollment of candidates by examination bodies to ensure that non-school candidates are not enrolled for the examination.

13 Ensuring that all examination takes off at the same time in each examination centre.

14 Empowerment of teachers (robust salaries, special welfare, etc) by the government as a means to stop teachers’ abetting of examination malpractice

15 Ensuring that examination papers are properly sealed and protected to prevent leakage before the examination.

16 Acquainting examination candidate with the rules and regulations guiding their examinations by examination bodies.

17 Proper check of student’s passports before the examinations so as to discourage impersonation.

18 Provision of adequate seats before the examination.

19 Providing adequate answer scripts and examination papers before the examination.

20 Appointment of invigilators early enough before the examination.

21

Provision of enough security at each of the examination centers to ensure security and uninterrupted examination.

22 Seating arrangements properly spaced from one student to the other to discourage malpractice.

23 Proper checking of students before the examination to ensure that no

foreign materials are with them.

24 Proper investigation of special centres for examination by examination bodies to ensure that they are not centres for examination malpractices.

25 Proper counseling of students by the teachers/counselors on the right choice of subjects based on their level of ability and interest.

26 Ensuring that schools preparing students for external examinations have all the facilities needed for the conduct of the examination.

27 Organizing seminars on the dangers and consequences of exanimation malpractices by examination bodies.

Cluster Two: Strategies for curbing malpractice during the examination.

S/No Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Swapping of examination centre supervisors on daily basis to guard against familiarity for examination malpractices.

2 Appending signatures on all the scripts used by the students in an examination by the supervisors.

3 Barring student(s) from entering the examination hall after 30 minutes of commencement of the examination

4 Unannounced visit to examination centres by external supervisors.

5 Ensuring that there is no faming out of question papers during the examination.

6 Ensuring that all answer scripts are collected by authorized person at the end of the examination.

7 Insisting that students do not talk during an examination.

8 Provision of adequate law enforcement agents to guard against intimidation of examination officials and supervisors by students.

9 Handling over to the law enforcement agents any candidates caught cheating during examination.

10 Barring from writing the examination any candidates caught cheating during an examination.

11 Providing adequate security for invigilators and examination officials against insult or assault from youths in the community to allow examination malpractice to take place in their centres

12 Prohibiting the bringing into the examination hall all electronic devices (G.S.M, pagers etc) during an examination.

13 Proper checking of students who are allowed to go out during an examination for conveniences to ensure that no foreign materials are with them.

14 Provision of financial incentive for examination officials, invigilators e.t.c who expose students indulging in examination malpractice during an examination.

15 Preventing individuals who are not registered examination candidates (external assistance) assisting students during an examination.

16 Ensuring that candidates allowed into the examination halls are not given extra time.

17 Ensuring that students fill an attendance form, this must be collected by the invigilator on each paper.

18 Ensuring that all candidates are in the examination hall 10 minutes before the scheduled time for the examination.

19 Handing over to the law enforcement agents, all those caught giving assistance to candidate during an examination.

20 Barring of candidates from writing the entire examination if caught cheating.

21 Preventing candidates from giraffing during an examination.

22 Preventing the use of prepared materials during an examination.

Cluster Three: Strategies adopted in curbing post-examination malpractice

S/N Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Cancellation of entire results for mass malpractice in any examination centre.

2 Cancellation of subject result for mass cheating in any examination centre.

3 Cancellation of candidate’s result if caught cheating.

4 Jail terms on conviction of any agents of examination malpractice.

5 Emphases on skill acquisition of employees for job employment.

6 Banning of schools involved in examination malpractices from writing external examinations.

7 Imprisonment of supervisors for aiding and abetting examination malpractice.

8 Dismissal of law enforcement agents involved in examination malpractice.

9 Blacklisting of agents of examination malpractices caught.

10 Dismissal of Principals caught conniving with students or agents to engage in examination malpractice.

11 Provision of job opportunities for youths who are graduates from various universities.

12 Campaign jingles and appeals to students/parents to avoid examination malpractice.

13 Jail terms for the agents involved in examination malpractice in various special centres.

14 Blacklisting of teachers involved in examination malpractice.

15 Embossment of Photographs on candidate certificates to render the certificate useless in the case of impersonation.

16 Withholding of candidates’ results when examination malpractice is suspected for proper investigation.

17 Disqualification of answers written on papers other than the one provided for.

18 Barring of candidates caught cheating from future external examinations.

19 Remarking of examination scripts when examination malpractice is suspected.

20 Provision of Malpractice Commission by the government to address this social vice.

21 Use of security bags to collect all answer booklets, kept in a safe place to ensure that already answered scripts are not slipped into it.

APPENDIX VII

Factor Analysis

Communalities

Initial Extraction

item1 1.000 .057

item2 1.000 .416

item3 1.000 .098

item4 1.000 .141

item5 1.000 .474

item6 1.000 .077

item7 1.000 .376

item8 1.000 .143

item9 1.000 .484

item10 1.000 .355

item11 1.000 .379

item12 1.000 .329

item13 1.000 .335

item14 1.000 .469

item15 1.000 .175

item16 1.000 .085

item17 1.000 .124

item18 1.000 .374

item19 1.000 .222

item20 1.000 .272

ietm21 1.000 .519

item22 1.000 .074

item23 1.000 .365

item24 1.000 .104

item25 1.000 .452

item26 1.000 .372

item27 1.000 .119

item28 1.000 .258

item29 1.000 .225

item30 1.000 .271

item31 1.000 .218

item32 1.000 .131

item33 1.000 .150

item34 1.000 .023

item35 1.000 .114

item36 1.000 .364

item37 1.000 .165

item38 1.000 .425

item39 1.000 .193

item40 1.000 .123

item41 1.000 .502

item42 1.000 .321

item43 1.000 .111

item44 1.000 .528

item45 1.000 .276

item46 1.000 .537

item47 1.000 .151

item48 1.000 .422

item49 1.000 .177

item50 1.000 .289

item51 1.000 .030

item52 1.000 .176

item53 1.000 .032

item54 1.000 .087

item55 1.000 .166

item56 1.000 .202

item57 1.000 .239

item58 1.000 .261

item59 1.000 .054

item60 1.000 .177

item61 1.000 .366

item62 1.000 .302

item63 1.000 .452

item64 1.000 .154

item65 1.000 .117

item66 1.000 .225

item67 1.000 .107

item68 1.000 .466

item69 1.000 .344

item70 1.000 .039

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

APPENDIX VIII

Rotated Component Matrixa

Component 1 2 3

item1 .096 .211 .057

item2 .061 -.122 .630

item3 .024 .309 -.040

item4 .136 -.078 .342

item5 -.046 .680 .101

item6 -.033 .247 .123

item7 .272 .538 -.114

item8 .347 -.135 .065

item9 .283 .626 .108

item10 .181 .149 .548

item11 -.052 .272 .550

item12 .180 .019 -.544

item13 .134 -.026 .563

item14 .414 .484 -.252

item15 -.051 .195 .367

item16 -.273 .085 -.055

item17 -.118 .331 .014

item18 .306 .506 -.158

item19 -.092 .455 -.079

item20 .519 .022 .046

ietm21 .248 .210 .643

item22 -.081 .021 -.259

item23 -.018 -.015 .603

item24 .180 .231 -.134

item25 -.029 .668 .069

item26 .440 -.211 .366

item27 -.098 .291 -.159

item28 .339 .359 -.122

item29 .041 .448 .150

item30 .382 .353 -.027

item31 .014 .272 .380

item32 .322 .154 .061

item33 -.230 .076 .302

item34 .028 -.150 .019

item35 -.325 -.044 -.082

item36 .320 -.466 -.210

item37 -.082 -.263 .298

item38 .440 -.348 .333

item39 .038 .336 .281

item40 .302 -.176 -.035

item41 .200 .647 .210

item42 .407 .293 -.262

item43 .180 .180 .215

item44 .726 .029 .001

item45 -.039 .381 .360

item46 .711 .017 .177

item47 .284 .182 .193

item48 .641 -.099 -.034

item49 .336 .253 .020

item50 .377 .133 -.359

item51 -.056 .162 .012

item52 .398 .035 -.129

item53 .138 -.072 .088

item54 .193 -.056 .217

item55 .057 .399 .058

item56 -.308 .072 .319

item57 .472 .010 .127

item58 .216 -.041 -.461

item59 -.127 .104 .164

item60 .236 -.347 .034

item61 .062 .539 .269

item62 .523 .149 .078

item63 .605 -.184 .230

item64 .354 .157 -.068

item65 .107 .113 .305

item66 -.073 .469 .019

item67 -.001 .275 .176

item68 .646 .150 -.161

item69 .301 .017 .503

item70 .058 .185 .031

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 8 iterations.

Component Transformation Matrix

Component 1 2 3

1 .681 .652 .334

2 .730 -.568 -.380

3 .059 -.503 .863

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

APPENDIX IX

PART 1

PERSONAL DATA

INSTRUCTION: - Please tick � as the response that best describe you.

2. Sex: (a) male (b) female

2. Status: Principal

Teacher

Parent

Student

PART 2

Instruction: please kindly use the following scale to indicate your perception of the effectiveness

of the existing strategies for curbing pre- examination, during the examination, and post –

examination malpractices. Tick (�) the response appropriate to you. You may either use pen or

pencil.

N/B : V.E= Very Effective, E=Effective, S.E=Slightly Effective, N.E= Not Effective

Cluster 1: Strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractices.

S/N Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Appointment of supervisors early enough before the examination.

2 Provision of adequate mobility for supervisors by examination bodies.

3 Preventing unauthorized external candidates from registering for any public examination.

4 Organizing enlightenment campaigns for students and teachers on examination malpractice and their penalties before the examination.

5 Providing enough personnel for supervision and invigilation of public examination.

6 Pasting fliers on the penalties of examination malpractice at all examination centres.

7 Registration of students with their e- passports.

8 Ensuring that examination questions are within the syllabus and of average difficulty level of the students.

9 Ensuring that teachers, invigilators, and supervisors are well remunerated to guard against involvement in malpractice.

10 Ensuring that all examination takes off at the same time in each examination centre.

11 Ensuring that examination papers are properly sealed and protected to prevent leakage before the examination.

12 Provision of adequate seats before the examination.

13 Providing adequate answer scripts and examination papers before the examination.

14 Appointment of invigilators early enough before the examination.

15

Provision of enough security at each of the examination centers to ensure security and uninterrupted examination.

16 Proper checking of students before the examination to ensure that no foreign materials are with them.

17 Proper counseling of students by the teachers/counselors on the right choice of subjects based on their level of ability and interest.

Cluster Two: Strategies for curbing malpractice during the examination.

S/No Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Appending signatures on all the scripts used by the students in an examination by the supervisors.

2 Unannounced visit to examination centres by external supervisors.

3 Ensuring that there is no faming out of question papers during the examination.

4 Ensuring that all answer scripts are collected by authorized person at the end of the examination.

5 Handling over to the law enforcement agents any candidates caught cheating during examination.

6 Prohibiting the bringing into the examination hall all electronic devices (G.S.M, pagers etc) during an examination

7 Proper checking of students who are allowed to go out during an examination for conveniences to ensure that no foreign materials are with them.

8 Provision of financial incentive for examination officials, invigilators e.t.c who expose students indulging in examination malpractice during an examination.

9 Preventing individuals who are not registered examination candidates (external assistance) assisting students during an examination.

10 Ensuring that students fill an attendance form, this must be collected by the invigilator on each paper.

11 Handing over to the law enforcement agents, all those caught giving assistance to candidate during an examination.

12 Preventing candidates from giraffing during an examination.

13 Preventing the use of prepared materials during an examination.

Cluster Three: Strategies adopted in curbing post-examination malpractice

S/N Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Cancellation of entire results for mass malpractice in any examination centre.

2 Cancellation of candidate’s result if caught cheating.

3 Banning of schools involved in examination malpractices from writing external examinations.

4 Imprisonment of supervisors for aiding and abetting examination malpractice.

5 Dismissal of law enforcement agents involved in examination malpractice.

6 Campaign jingles and appeals to students/parents to avoid examination malpractice.

7 Jail terms the agents involved in examination malpractice in various special centres.

8 Blacklisting of teachers involved in examination malpractice.

9 Embossment of Photographs on candidate certificates to render the certificate useless in the case of impersonation.

10 Withholding of candidates’ results when examination malpractice is suspected for proper investigation.

11 Disqualification of answers written on papers other than the one provided for.

12 Remarking of examination scripts when examination malpractice is suspected.

APPENDIX X

PART 1

PERSONAL DATA

INSTRUCTION: - Please tick � as the response that best describe you.

3. Sex: (a) male (b) female

2. Status: Principal

Teacher

Parent

Student

PART 2

Instruction: please kindly use the following scale to indicate your perception of the effectiveness

of the existing strategies for curbing pre- examination, during the examination, and post –

examination malpractices. Tick (�) the response appropriate to you. You may either use pen or

pencil.

N/B : V.E= Very Effective, E=Effective, S.E=Slightly Effective, N.E= Not Effective

Cluster 1: Strategies adopted in curbing pre-examination malpractices.

S/N Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Providing enough personnel for supervision and invigilation of public examination.

2 Pasting fliers on the penalties of examination malpractice at all examination centres.

3 Registration of students with their e- passports.

4 Ensuring that examination questions are within the syllabus and of

average difficulty level of the students.

5 Ensuring that teachers, invigilators, and supervisors are well remunerated to guard against involvement in malpractice.

6 Ensuring that all examination takes off at the same time in each examination centre.

7 Ensuring that examination papers are properly sealed and protected to prevent leakage before the examination.

8 Providing adequate answer scripts and examination papers before the examination.

9

Provision of enough security at each of the examination centers to ensure security and uninterrupted examination.

10 Proper checking of students before the examination to ensure that no foreign materials are with them.

Cluster Two: Strategies for curbing malpractice during the examination.

S/No Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Appending signatures on all the scripts used by the students in an examination by the supervisors.

2 Ensuring that there is no faming out of question papers during the examination.

3 Ensuring that all answer scripts are collected by authorized person at the end of the examination.

4 Handling over to the law enforcement agents any candidates caught cheating during examination.

5 Prohibiting the bringing into the examination hall all electronic devices (G.S.M, pagers etc) during an examination

6 Provision of financial incentive for examination officials, invigilators e.t.c who expose students indulging in examination malpractice during an examination.

7 Preventing individuals who are not registered examination candidates (external assistance) assisting students during an examination.

8 Handing over to the law enforcement agents, all those caught giving assistance to candidate during an examination.

9 Preventing candidates from giraffing during an examination.

10 Preventing the use of prepared materials during an examination.

Cluster Three: Strategies adopted in curbing post-examination malpractice

S/N Strategies V.E E S.E N.E

1 Cancellation of entire results for mass malpractice in any examination centre.

2 Cancellation of candidate’s result if caught cheating.

3 Banning of schools involved in examination malpractices from writing external examinations.

4 Imprisonment of supervisors for aiding and abetting examination malpractice.

5 Jail terms the agents involved in examination malpractice in various special centres.

6 Blacklisting of teachers involved in examination malpractice.

7 Embossment of Photographs on candidate certificates to render the certificate useless in the case of impersonation.

8 Withholding of candidates’ results when examination malpractice is suspected for proper investigation.

9 Disqualification of answers written on papers other than the one provided for.

10 Remarking of examination scripts when examination malpractice is suspected.

APPENDIX XI

Scale: ALL VARIABLES

Case Processing Summary

N %

Valid 50 100.0

Excludeda 0 .0

Cases

Total 50 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.770 27

Reliability

Scale: ALL VARIABLES

Case Processing Summary

N %

Valid 50 100.0

Excludeda 0 .0

Cases

Total 50 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.869 22

Reliability

Scale: ALL VARIABLES

Case Processing Summary

N %

Valid 50 100.0

Excludeda 0 .0

Cases

Total 50 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.852 21

Reliability

Scale: ALL VARIABLES

Case Processing Summary

N %

Valid 50 100.0

Excludeda 0 .0

Cases

Total 50 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha

No of Items

.860 70