Тайное становится явным?
The study aims to find out how plagiarism and cheating as dishonest practices correlate with personal characteristics of students (e.g. their involvement in learning and research activities) and specific features of the learning environment. The survey of university students and professors conducted as part of the 2014 Monitoring of Education Markets and Organizations provided the empirical basis for research. The impact of factors was assessed using two binary logistic regressions with response variables describing presence/absence of cheating and plagiarism experience. We show that these types of academic misconduct are not affected by whether or not the university applies formal or informal plagiarism checking techniques. Professor intolerance to cheating and willingness to take strict punitive measures appears to play a more important role in preventing academic dishonesty. Probability of using dishonest practices is also decreased by such factors as intensive preparation for classes, confidence in working in one’s field of study in the future, orientation towards the quality of education instead of its accessibility when choosing university and major.
We develop an original method of student cheating evaluation that is based on the comparison of students’ grades on exams in class, homeworks and experimental homework. The data for the study is collected from the survey of 2013 sophomores of the International College of Economics and Finance at the National Research University Higher School of Economics in Russia. At the end of the statistics course in addition to standard assignments (homeworks and exams) students were given experimental homework with the rule of limited cooperation among students. The violation of this rule was considered as cheating. The scale of cooperation is measured and then tested through different methods including the stochastic frontier; it reveals connection with the GPA level, students’ expectations of the cheaters’ share and their moral norms. We also find different behavioral patterns for high and low performing students as well as country specific context of student cheating behavior.
Academic dishonesty (e.g. cheating and plagiarism) is a pervasive and serious problem, which may jeopardize the quality of Russian educational system. Elaboration and implementation of preventive measures requires valid and reliable data on the reasons for students using unethical and dishonest strategies while enrolled in university. Nonetheless, there is no research on factors of academic dishonesty among Russian students. This article provides a review of foreign and Russian studies aimed at formulation of initial ideas about determinants and peculiarities of academic dishonesty, which may help formulate adequate hypotheses and research questions for the study of dishonest behavior among students of Russian universities. The paper enumerates the most popular approaches to the study of academic fraud: an economic approach based on G. Becker’s economic theory on crime and an approach rooted in the theory of planned behavior developed by I. Ajzen. Moreover, it describes the advantages and disadvantages of the most frequently applied methods for measuring factual academic dishonesty: direct question survey method and the surreptitious method. Findings about Russian academic dishonesty are also introduced. The latter part is devoted to a description of two groups of possible factors: individual and contextual.
Institutions affect investment decisions, including investments in human capital. Hence institutions are relevant for the allocation of talent. Good market-supporting institutions attract talent to productive value-creating activities, whereas poor ones raise the appeal of rent-seeking. We propose a theoretical model that predicts that more talented individuals are particularly sensitive in their career choices to the quality of institutions, and test these predictions on a sample of around 95 countries of the world. We find a strong positive association between the quality of institutions and graduation of college and university students in science, and an even stronger negative correlation with graduation in law. Our findings are robust to various specifications of empirical models, including smaller samples of former colonies and transition countries. The quality of human capital makes the distinction between educational choices under strong and weak institutions particularly sharp. We show that the allocation of talent is an important link between institutions and growth.