Hur uppfattar elever omgivningens sociala tryck gällande skolfusk?

Main Article Content

Lars Fonseca

Abstract

Both earlier Swedish research and reports in the Swedish media suggest that students and teachers perceive norm conflicts regarding test-taking and grading: on one hand, high-school-students (year 7 -12) and teachers feel expected to strictly adhere to rules prohibiting cheating in school; on the other hand, they feel expected to apply these rules flexibly to facilitate students achieving good grades. This study aims to address this conflict from student perspective and answer the following question: To what extent do high-school students perceive that social norms support rules against school cheating? The data for this quantitative study was collected from 199 high-school students. Using a norm-sociological model (Svensson, 2008), the data was subsequently analysed to illuminate in what way students understood the social norm against cheating in school and what significance they allocated to these values ​​in their social environments. The results show that the high-school students perceived the social norm against cheating to be significantly stronger than the social norm for cheating. Secondly, the students perceived that teachers, principals and parents clearly viewed cheating negatively, and imbued the no-cheating norm with great importance. Thirdly, the students perceived that their peers were ambivalent to cheating.

Article Details

How to Cite
Fonseca, L. (2020). Hur uppfattar elever omgivningens sociala tryck gällande skolfusk?. Educare - Vetenskapliga Skrifter, (2), 27-48. https://doi.org/10.24834/educare.2020.2.2
Section
Articles

References

Aasheim, C. L., Rutner, P. S., Li, L., & Williams, S. R. (2012). Plagiarism and programming: A survey of student attitudes. Journal of information systems education, (23), 297-313.
Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Aktuellt (2017). SvT. Tillgänglig 18-05-08 på https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/anna-ekstrom-s-i-aktuellt-lagstifta-mot-snallbetyg.
Allelin, M. (2019). Skola för lönsamhet: Om elevers marknadsanpassade villkor och vardag (Doctoral dissertation, Arkiv förlag & tidskrift).
Anderman, E. M., & Koenka, A. C. (2017). The relation between academic motivation and cheating. Theory Into Practice, 56(2), 95-102.
Barnhardt, B. (2016). The “epidemic” of cheating depends on its definition: A critique of inferring the moral quality of “cheating in any form”. Ethics & Behavior, 26(4), 330-343.
Brown B. (2004). Adolescents’ relationships with peers. In: Lerner R, Steinberg L, editors. Handbook of adolescent psychology, 363–394. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley.
Colnerud, G., & Rosander, M. (2009). Academic dishonesty, ethical norms and learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, (34), 505-517.
Durkheim, É. (1922/1956). Education and sociology. New York: Free Press.
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International organization, (52), 887-917.
Fonseca, L. (2014). Det godkända fusket: normförhandlingar i gymnasieskolans bedömningspraktiker. Diss. (sammanfattning), Kalmar: Linnéuniversitetet, 2014. Växjö
Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. London: Polity.
Harding, T. S., Mayhew, M. J., Finelli, C. J., & Carpenter, D. D. (2007). The theory of planned behavior as a model of academic dishonesty in engineering and humanities undergraduates. Ethics & Behavior, (17), 255-279.
Hult, Å. & Hult, H. (2003). Att fuska och plagiera: ett sätt att leva eller ett sätt att överleva?. Linköping: Univ., Centrum för undervisning och lärande (CUL).
Hydén, H. (2002). Normvetenskap. Lund: Sociologiska institutionen, Lunds universitet.
Jordan, A. E. (2001). College student cheating: The role of motivation, perceived norms, attitudes, and knowledge of institutional policy. Ethics & Behavior, (11), 233-247.
Lang, J.M. (2013). Cheating lessons: learning from academic dishonesty. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Lärarnas Riksförbund (2011). Betygsättning under påverkan. Tillgänglig 17-05-08 på https://www.lr.se/download/18.666662ff133985ab7bc8000789/1350672765450/Betygsattning_under_paverkan.pdf
Mayhew, M. J., Hubbard, S. M., Finelli, C. J., Harding, T. S., & Carpenter, D. D. (2009). Using structural equation modeling to validate the theory of planned behavior as a model for predicting student cheating. The Review of Higher Education, (32), 441-468.
McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics &Behavior, (11), 219-232.
McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2002). Honor codes and other contextual influences on academic integrity: a replication and extension of modified honor code settings. Research in Higher Education, (43), 357–378.
McCabe, D.L., Butterfield, K.D. & Treviño, L.K. (2012). Cheating in college: why students do it and what educators can do about it. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mickwitz, L. (2015a): En reformerad lärare. Konstruktionen av en professionell och Betygssättande lärare i skolpolitik och skolpraktik. (Diss.) Stockholm: Stockholms universitet.
Mickwitz, L. (2015b). Den professionella lärarens möjlighetsvillkor. Utbildning & Demokrati, (24), 33-54.
Mihelič, K. K., & Culiberg, B. (2014). Turning a blind eye: A study of peer reporting in a business school setting. Ethics & behavior, 24(5), 364-381.
Murdock, T. B., Stephens, J. M., & Grotewiel, M. M. (2016). Student dishonesty in the face of assessment: Who, why, and what we can do about it. In G. T. L. Brown & L. R. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 186–203). New York, NY: Routledge.
Nilsson, L-E., Lönn Svensson, A., & Orlenius, K. (2009). Plagiat –En pedagogisk utmaning. Kristianstad: Högskolan i Kristianstad.
Simkin, M. G., & McLeod, A. (2010). Why do college students cheat?. Journal of Business Ethics, (94), 441-453.
Skollagen (2010). Skollagen (SFS 2010:800). Stockholm: Norstedts juridik.
Stephens, J. M. (2018). Bridging the Divide: The Role of Motivation and Self-Regulation in Explaining the Judgment-Action Gap Related to Academic Dishonesty. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 246.
Stockholmsenkäten (2016). Stockholm: Stockholms stad. Tillgänglig 18-08-09 på https://www.google.com/search?q=STOCKholmsenk%C3%A4ten+2016&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab
Stone, T. H., Jawahar, I. M., & Kisamore, J. L. (2009). Using the theory of planned behavior and cheating justifications to predict academic misconduct. Career Development International, (14), 221–241.
Svensson, M. (2008). Sociala normer och regelefterlevnad (Doctoral dissertation). Lund: Lund University.
UG (Uppdrag Granskning) (2017). Det nationella provet (manus), SvT. Tillgänglig 17-05-23 på https://www.svt.se/nyheter/granskning/ug/referens/det-nationella-provet
Vlachos, J. (2010). Betygets värde. En analys av hur konkurrens påverkar betygssättningen vid svenska skolor. Uppdragsforskningsrapport 2010: 6, Konkurrensverket.
Whitley, B.E. & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2002). Academic dishonesty: an educator's guide. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.