ÖĞRENCİLERİN KOPYA HAKKINDAKİ GÖRÜŞLERİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Yıl 2008, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 3, 375 - 393, 01.09.2008

Ahmet Tayfun İrfan Yazıcıoğlu

Öz

Günümüzde eğitim hayatının en önemli sorunlarından biride kopya davranışıdır. Bu konuda
uluslararası ve ulusal düzeyde çeşitli çalışmalar yapılmıştır. Bu çalışmaları üç genel başlık altında
toplamak mümkündür. Bunlar; cinsiyet ve kopya davranışı, sosyal etmenler ve kopya davranışı, idare ve
öğretmenlerin tutumları ve kopya davranışıdır. Yapılan bu çalışmaların bazılarında birbirini destekleyici
sonuçlar bulunurken bazılarında farklı sonuçlara ulaşılmıştır. Literatüre bu kapsamda katkıda bulunmak
amacı ile gerçekleştirilen bu araştırmada öğrencilerin bulundukları sınıf ile gözetmenler, akademik
personel ve idarenin kopyaya ilişkin tutumlarını değerlendirmeleri arasındaki ilişki incelenmiştir.
Araştırma Gazi Üniversitesi Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesinde okuyan toplam 493 öğrenci üzerinde
gerçekleştirilmiştir. Verilerin toplanmasında anket yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Anketler beşli Likert ölçeğine
göre hazırlanmıştır. Elde edilen veriler SPSS paket programında analiz edilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde ki
kare testi kullanılmıştır. Test sonucunda öğrencilerin bulundukları sınıf ile gözetmenlerin kopya
olaylarına göz yumduğunu, hocaların kopya olaylarında ayrımcılık yaptığını, idarenin kopya olaylarına
ilişkin cezalarda ayrımcılık yaptığını, fakültede kopya olaylarının problem boyutuna ulaştığını
düşünmeleri arasında anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kopya, eğitim, gözetmen, sınav

AN INVESTIGATION ON THE PERSPECTIVES OF THE STUDENTS ON CHEATING

Öz

Today, the cheating behavior is one of the important problems of education. Many studies about
this phenomenon were carried out in national and international level. It is possible to evaluate this study
under three main titles: Gender and cheating behavior, social factors and cheating behavior and
managers and teachers’ attitudes and cheating behavior. Although the results of the some studies support
each others, some studies results are different. One of the main purposes of that study is to make some
contributions to literature in this scope to examine the relationship between academic term of students
and the evaluations of students for supervisor, academic staffs and administration’ attitudes towards
cheating. This Study is carried out over 493 students in Educational Faculty of Commerce and Tourism.
Data were collected by using questionnaires including five- item Likert type questions, and analyzed in
SPSS pocket program. The significant results had been found between the academic terms of student and
their evaluation of the supervisors, teachers and administration’s attitudes towards cheating.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Cheating, education, supervisor, examination.

Kaynakça

• Ames, C. ve Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260–267.
• Baird, J. S. (1980). Current trends in college cheating. Psychology in the Schools, 17, 515–522.
• Calabrese, R. L. ve Cochran, J. T. (1990). The relationship of alienation to cheating among a sample of American adolescents. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 23(2), 65–72.
• Cochran, J. K., Wood, P. B., Sellers, C. S., Wilkerson, W. ve Chamlin, M. B. (1998). Academic dishonesty and low self-control: An empirical test of a general theory of crime. Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 227–255.
• Davis, S. F., Grover, C. A., Becker, A. H. ve McGregor, L. N. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishments. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 16–20.
• Goodenow, C. (1993). Classroom belonging among early adolescents: Relationships to motivation and achievement. Journal of Early Adolescence, 13, 21–43.
• Graham, M. A., Monday, J., O’Brien, K. ve Steffen, S. (1994). Cheating at small colleges: An examination of student and faculty attitudes and behaviors. Journal of College Student Development, 35, 255–260.
• 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, 342–354.
• Houston, J. P. (1977). Four Components of Rotter’s internal – external scale and cheating. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2, 275–283.
• Jensen, L. A., Arnett, J. J., Feldman, S. H. ve Cauffman, E. (2002). It’s wrong but everybody does it: Academic dishonesty among high school and college students, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 209–228.
• Jhonson, C.D., Gromly, J. (1972). Academic Cheating: The contribution of sex, personality and situational variables. Developmental Psychology, 6, 320–324.
• Juvonen, J. ve Wentzel, K. R. (1996). Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
• Kelly, J. A. ve Worell, L. (1978). Personality Characteristics, parents behaviors, and s of subject in relation to cheating. Journal of Research in Personality, 12, 179–188.
• Karabenick, S. A. ve Srull, T. K. (1978). Effects of personality and situational variation in locus of control on academic cheating: Determinants of the ‘‘congruence effect.’’ Journal of Personality, 46, 72–95.
• McCabe, D. M., Trevino, L. K. ve Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: a decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 219–232.
• McLaughlin, R. D. ve Ross, S. M. (1989). Student cheating in high school: a case of moral reasoning vs. “fuzzy logic”, High School Journal, 72, 97–104.
• Michaels, J. W. ve Miethe, T. D. (1989). Applying theories of deviance to academic cheating. SocialScience Quarterly, 70, 870–885.
• Midgley, C. ve Urdan, T. (2001). Academic self-handicapping and achievement goals: A further examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 61– 75.
• Newstead, S. E., Franklyn-Stokes, A. ve Armstead, P. (1996). Individual differences in student cheating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 229–241.
• Roth, N. L. ve McCabe, D. L. (1995). Communication strategies for addressing academic dishonesty. Journal of College Student Development, 36, 531–541.
• Schab, F. (1991). Schooling without learning: thirty years of cheating in high school, Adolescence, 26, 839–847.
• Tang, S. ve Zuo, J. (1997). Profile of college examination cheaters. College Student Journal, 31, 340–346.
• Tibbetts, S. G. ve Myers, D. L. (1999). Low self-control, rational choice, and student test cheating, American Journal of Criminal Justice, 23, 179–200.
• Vitro, F. T. ve Schoer, L. A. (1972). The effects of probability of test success, test importance, and risk of detection on the incidence of cheating. Journal of School Psychology, 10, 269–277.
• Vitro, F. T. (1971). The Relationship of clasroom dishonesty to perceived parental discipline. Journal of College Student Personel, 12, 427–429.
• Ward, D. A. ve Beck, W. L. (1990). Gender and dishonesty. Journal of Social Psychology, 130(3), 333–339.