Literature Review #2

MLA Citation: 

Josien, Laurent, and Britton Broderick. "Cheating In Higher Education: The Case of Multi-Method Cheaters." Academy of Educational Leadership Journal;2013 17.3 (2013): 93. Ebsco host. Web. 15 Oct. 2013.

Summary: 

This Journal offers many raw numbers on the amount of people cheating and the demographics of those people. It also goes on to analyze the individual characteristics behind the people who cheat, and the motivations and reasons for why they lead a path of academic dishonesty. After all of the analysis of the raw numbers, Laurent and Broderick go on to show the findings of their own study that they pursued. They describe how they went about administering the study and what the limitations of the results were. 

Authors:

Laurent Josien and Broderick Britton of Utah Valley University. Both of these professors teach business and have a good background of credentials. 

Key Terms:

Ethical Conduct: The manner by which a student and or professor is expected to uphold in the face of academic dishonesty

Peer Related Contextual Factors: Factors that hold the strongest weight in deterring a student from cheating. Social pressure that shows a distaste for cheating is the best way to stop a student from cheating.

Quotes:

"They also ventured that there is a difference in the threat to the academic community from students cheating once compared to students cheating multiple times. Following that line of thought, we advance that not only students who cheat multiple times are a threat to academia but those who cheat multiple times with different methods are even more of a threat as it indicates a clear, conscious, active decision to engage in academic dishonesty. We formulate that these multi-methods cheaters are individuals that considers cheating as an acceptable mean to achieve their end, and that they adapt their method to the opportunity available to them at the time. This attitude should put these students in a different group altogether, as they are different than students who cheated only once." 

"More specifically, McCabe and Trevino (1997) found that cheating was influenced by age, gender, grade point average, peers, and Greek membership."

"Also, there is a developing body of evidence that academic dishonesty is increasing; with the increase in tuition, the advance in technology, and the increase in online class offerings, new ways to engage in academic dishonesty are available for potential cheaters"

Value:

This journal should hold up as a valuable source for my paper. It contains a lot of key statistics regarding demographics and raw material. It also breaks down the motivations behind cheating and how individual characteristics affect a students decision on whether or not they should cheat. I expect to be looking at this in the future.