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, (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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1308172

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2015.1026595

Brown B. (2004). Adolescents’ relationships with peers. In: Lerner R, Steinberg L, editors. Handbook of adolescent psychology, 363–394. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780471726746.ch12

Colnerud, G., & Rosander, M. (2009). Academic dishonesty, ethical norms and learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, (34), 505-517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930802155263

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550789

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1564.001.0001

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420701519239

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327019EB1103_3

Lang, J.M. (2013). Cheating lessons: learning from academic dishonesty. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674726239

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.0080

McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics &Behavior, (11), 219-232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327019EB1103_2

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014893102151

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48059/uod.v24i2.1035

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2013.854170

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0275-x

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00246

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430910966415

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. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410608277