東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

The many sides of academic dishonest...

Beasley, Eric Matthew.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The many sides of academic dishonesty sanctions.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The many sides of academic dishonesty sanctions./
作者:	Beasley, Eric Matthew.
面頁冊數:	149 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 73-12(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International73-12A(E).
標題:	Sociology, Social Structure and Development. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3522587
ISBN:	9781267547774

The many sides of academic dishonesty sanctions.
Beasley, Eric Matthew.

The many sides of academic dishonesty sanctions. - 149 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 73-12(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Michigan State University, 2012.

In the fall of 2009, Michigan State University (MSU) implemented a new policy regarding reports of undergraduate academic dishonesty. Under the new system, instructors are required to submit an academic dishonesty report for any student that they penalize for violations of academic integrity, and these students are placed into a remediation class that I teach. I analyzed student responses from the course, compared course student responses and demographics with those of the larger MSU and national undergraduate populations, compared instructors' descriptions of the events that led to the report being filed with those of students, and performed a longitudinal analysis of course student's attitudes. Demographically, reported students appear to be very similar to those that make up the overall undergraduate population with one major exception: international students are over-represented among the reported by a factor of five as compared to their share of the MSU student population. For all students, ignorance of the rules and punishments for transgressions of the rules were the most frequently self-reported influencers of the students' actions. Student responses also showed evidence of neutralization, rational choice, strain, and poor time management as being contributors to their malfeasance. While most students admitted to some wrongdoing, they regularly did not conceptualize the incident as being as egregious or clear-cut as did the faculty. My findings indicate a frequent and sizable divide in the way reporting faculty frame the actions of reported students and the way reported students frame the actions that led to their report.

ISBN: 9781267547774Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017425
Sociology, Social Structure and Development.

The many sides of academic dishonesty sanctions.
LDR:02562nam a2200313 4500 001 1968285
005 20141203120931.5
008 150210s2012 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781267547774
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3522587
035 $a AAI3522587
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Beasley, Eric Matthew. $3 2105428
245 1 4 $a The many sides of academic dishonesty sanctions.
300 $a 149 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 73-12(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Tom Conner.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Michigan State University, 2012.
520 $a In the fall of 2009, Michigan State University (MSU) implemented a new policy regarding reports of undergraduate academic dishonesty. Under the new system, instructors are required to submit an academic dishonesty report for any student that they penalize for violations of academic integrity, and these students are placed into a remediation class that I teach. I analyzed student responses from the course, compared course student responses and demographics with those of the larger MSU and national undergraduate populations, compared instructors' descriptions of the events that led to the report being filed with those of students, and performed a longitudinal analysis of course student's attitudes. Demographically, reported students appear to be very similar to those that make up the overall undergraduate population with one major exception: international students are over-represented among the reported by a factor of five as compared to their share of the MSU student population. For all students, ignorance of the rules and punishments for transgressions of the rules were the most frequently self-reported influencers of the students' actions. Student responses also showed evidence of neutralization, rational choice, strain, and poor time management as being contributors to their malfeasance. While most students admitted to some wrongdoing, they regularly did not conceptualize the incident as being as egregious or clear-cut as did the faculty. My findings indicate a frequent and sizable divide in the way reporting faculty frame the actions of reported students and the way reported students frame the actions that led to their report.
590 $a School code: 0128.
650 4 $a Sociology, Social Structure and Development. $3 1017425
650 4 $a Education, Sociology of. $3 626654
650 4 $a Sociology, Criminology and Penology. $3 1017569
650 4 $a Education, Higher. $3 543175
650 4 $a Education, Higher Education Administration. $3 1669382
690 $a 0700
690 $a 0340
690 $a 0627
690 $a 0745
690 $a 0446
710 2 $a Michigan State University. $b Sociology. $3 2093954
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 73-12A(E).
790 $a 0128
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2012
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3522587