Üniversite Öğrencilerinin İnternet Tabanlı Akademik Usulsüzlük Nedenlerinin Çeşitli Değişkenlere Göre İncelenmesi

Feza Orhan; Ayşe Günay

doi:10.12984/eed.41835

-

Yıl 2014, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1, 176 - 190, 10.07.2014

Feza Orhan , Ayşe Günay

https://doi.org/10.12984/eed.41835

Cited By: 5

Öz

While internet facilitates the daily life and academic studies in terms of websites with downloadable assignments and copy and paste features, it provides unlimited irregularities features has become a problem that must be tackled in the teaching and learning process. In order to prevent the academic dishonesty of the students, first of all we have to understand the reasons of this behavior can be an effective way to develop solutions in this direction. In this research, the opinions of the 524 students from different faculties are examined about plagiarism from the internet by taking age, gender and faculty variables into consideration. Data were collected by a questionnaire develop by the researchers in this descriptive study. Percent- frequency, arithmetic mean, standard deviation, t-test, one- way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test are used in the analysis of the data. According to the findings of the study, the reasons of the academic dishonesty from the internet has emerged as the quality of the homework, evaluation method of the instructor, students’ affective approach towards to the lesson and time management that shows statistically differences in terms of grade level, gender and faculty

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ethic, internet, academic dishonesty, e-dishonesty

Kaynakça

Albers-Miller, N. D., Straughan R. D. ve Prenshaw P. J. (2000). The relationship between cheating and university choice: An analysis of student perceptions". İçinde Capozzoli E.A.,Tudor R.K., and McKee D, (Ed.), Advances in Marketing, Southwestern Marketing Association, Troy State University and Kennesaw State University.
Antonio, D. L. ve Michael, W. B. (1983). Short-Term Predictive Validity of Demographic, Affective, Personal and Cognitive Variables in Relation to 2 Criterion Measures of Cheating Behaviors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43(2), 467-483.
Austin, M. J. ve Brown, L. D. (1999). Internet plagiarism: Devoloping strategies to curb student academic dishonesty. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(1), 21-33.
Bowers, W. J. (1964). Student dishonesty and its control in college. NewYork: Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia University
Davis S.F., Drinan P.F. ve Gallant T.B. (2009). Reasons for Academic Disihonesty: Situation, Disposition and Changing Times, Cheating in School: What We Know and What We can Do. USA: Wiley- Blackwell.
Ersoy, A. ve Özden, M. (2011). The views of teacher candidates regarding the role of ınstructor in plagiarizing from internet in their assignments. Elementary Education Online, 10(2), 608- 619.
Haines, V. J., Diekhoff, G. M., LaBeff, E. E. ve Clark, R. E. (1986). College cheating: Immaturity, lack of commitment, and the neutralizing attitude. Research in Higher Education, 25(4), 342–54.
Karim, N. S. A., Zamzuri, N. H. A. ve Nor, Y. M. (2009). Exploring the relationship between ınternet ethics in university students and the big five model of personality. Computers and Education, 53, 86- 93.
Kelly, J. A. ve Worrell, L. (1978) Personality characteristics, parent behaviors, and sex of the subject in relation to cheating. Journal of Research in Personality, 12(3), 179–88.
Khodaie, E., Moghadamzadeh, A. ve Salehi, K. (2011). Factors affecting the probability of academic cheating school students in Tehran. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1587- 1595.
Leming, J. S. (1980). Cheating behavior, subject variables, and components of the ınternal- external scale under high and low risk conditions. Journal of Educational Research, 74(2), 83- 87.
Ludeman, W. W. (1938). A study of cheating in public schools. American School Boards Journal, 96(1), 45–6.
Okay, Ş. ve Aydoğan, E. (2010). A research on the vocational high school students’ intentions of internet usage. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23, 283-296.
Prenshaw, P. J., Straughan R. D., ve Albers-Miller N.D. (2001). university academic dishonesty policy and student perceptions of cheating: an exploratory content analysis across fourteen universities, advances in marketing, James L. Thomas, eds., Jacksonville, AL: Association of Collegiate Marketing Educators, 203-208.
Renard, L. (2000). Cut and paste 101: Plagiarism and the net, Educational Leadership. 57(4): 38- 42.
Roig, M. (2006). On the causes of academic dishonesty. The Journal of the European Medical Writers Association,15(4).
Roskens, R. W. ve Dizney, H. F. (1966). A study of unethical academic behavior in high school and college. Journal of Educational Research. 59(5), 231- 234
Selwyn, N. (2008). An investigation of differences in undergraduates’ academic use of the internet. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(11), 11-22.
Ward, D. A. ve Beck, W. L. (1990). Gender and dishonesty. The Journal of Social Psychology, 130(3), 333-339.

Üniversite Öğrencilerinin İnternet Tabanlı Akademik Usulsüzlük Nedenlerinin Çeşitli Değişkenlere Göre İncelenmesi

Yıl 2014, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1, 176 - 190, 10.07.2014

Feza Orhan , Ayşe Günay

https://doi.org/10.12984/eed.41835

Cited By: 5

Öz

Günlük hayatı ve akademik çalışmaları oldukça kolaylaştıran internet, beraberinde web sitelerinden indirilebilen ödevler, kopyala- yapıştır özellikleri sunması ve sınırsız usulsüzlüklere olanak sağlama özelliği ile de öğretim sürecinde ilgilenilmesi gereken bir sorun haline gelmiştir. Öğrencilerin intihal yapmalarını önlemek için her şeyden önce bu davranışlarının nedenlerini anlamak ve bu yönde çözümler geliştirmek etkili bir yol olabilir. Bu araştırmada, farklı fakültelerde öğrenim gören ve kolay ulaşılabilir örnekleme yöntemi ile oluşturulan 524 öğrencinin ödev ve projelerinde internetten aşırma davranışında bulunma nedenlerine ilişkin görüşleri, yaş cinsiyet ve fakülte değişkenlerine göre incelenmektedir Betimsel nitelikli bu araştırmada veriler araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen anket ile toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde yüzde-frekans, aritmetik ortalama, standart sapma, t-testi, tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve Tukey testi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın bulgularına göre, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi öğrencileri ile gerçekleştirilen bu çalışmada öğrencileri internetten akademik usulsüzlüğe iten nedenler verilen ödevlerin niteliği, değerlendirme yöntemi, öğrencilerin derse karşı duyuşsal yaklaşımı ve öğrencilerin ödev yapmadaki zaman yönetimi açısından cinsiyet, fakülte ve sınıf düzeyine göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Etik, internet, intihal, e- usulsüzlük, akademik usulsüzlük

Kaynakça

Albers-Miller, N. D., Straughan R. D. ve Prenshaw P. J. (2000). The relationship between cheating and university choice: An analysis of student perceptions". İçinde Capozzoli E.A.,Tudor R.K., and McKee D, (Ed.), Advances in Marketing, Southwestern Marketing Association, Troy State University and Kennesaw State University.
Antonio, D. L. ve Michael, W. B. (1983). Short-Term Predictive Validity of Demographic, Affective, Personal and Cognitive Variables in Relation to 2 Criterion Measures of Cheating Behaviors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43(2), 467-483.
Austin, M. J. ve Brown, L. D. (1999). Internet plagiarism: Devoloping strategies to curb student academic dishonesty. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(1), 21-33.
Bowers, W. J. (1964). Student dishonesty and its control in college. NewYork: Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia University
Davis S.F., Drinan P.F. ve Gallant T.B. (2009). Reasons for Academic Disihonesty: Situation, Disposition and Changing Times, Cheating in School: What We Know and What We can Do. USA: Wiley- Blackwell.
Ersoy, A. ve Özden, M. (2011). The views of teacher candidates regarding the role of ınstructor in plagiarizing from internet in their assignments. Elementary Education Online, 10(2), 608- 619.
Haines, V. J., Diekhoff, G. M., LaBeff, E. E. ve Clark, R. E. (1986). College cheating: Immaturity, lack of commitment, and the neutralizing attitude. Research in Higher Education, 25(4), 342–54.
Karim, N. S. A., Zamzuri, N. H. A. ve Nor, Y. M. (2009). Exploring the relationship between ınternet ethics in university students and the big five model of personality. Computers and Education, 53, 86- 93.
Kelly, J. A. ve Worrell, L. (1978) Personality characteristics, parent behaviors, and sex of the subject in relation to cheating. Journal of Research in Personality, 12(3), 179–88.
Khodaie, E., Moghadamzadeh, A. ve Salehi, K. (2011). Factors affecting the probability of academic cheating school students in Tehran. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1587- 1595.
Leming, J. S. (1980). Cheating behavior, subject variables, and components of the ınternal- external scale under high and low risk conditions. Journal of Educational Research, 74(2), 83- 87.
Ludeman, W. W. (1938). A study of cheating in public schools. American School Boards Journal, 96(1), 45–6.
Okay, Ş. ve Aydoğan, E. (2010). A research on the vocational high school students’ intentions of internet usage. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23, 283-296.
Prenshaw, P. J., Straughan R. D., ve Albers-Miller N.D. (2001). university academic dishonesty policy and student perceptions of cheating: an exploratory content analysis across fourteen universities, advances in marketing, James L. Thomas, eds., Jacksonville, AL: Association of Collegiate Marketing Educators, 203-208.
Renard, L. (2000). Cut and paste 101: Plagiarism and the net, Educational Leadership. 57(4): 38- 42.
Roig, M. (2006). On the causes of academic dishonesty. The Journal of the European Medical Writers Association,15(4).
Roskens, R. W. ve Dizney, H. F. (1966). A study of unethical academic behavior in high school and college. Journal of Educational Research. 59(5), 231- 234
Selwyn, N. (2008). An investigation of differences in undergraduates’ academic use of the internet. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(11), 11-22.
Ward, D. A. ve Beck, W. L. (1990). Gender and dishonesty. The Journal of Social Psychology, 130(3), 333-339.

Toplam 19 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil	Türkçe
Bölüm	Makaleler
Yazarlar	Feza Orhan Ayşe Günay Bu kişi benim
Yayımlanma Tarihi	10 Temmuz 2014
Yayımlandığı Sayı	Yıl 2014 Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA	Orhan, F., & Günay, A. (2014). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin İnternet Tabanlı Akademik Usulsüzlük Nedenlerinin Çeşitli Değişkenlere Göre İncelenmesi. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 15(1), 176-190. https://doi.org/10.12984/eed.41835