合作、串通与物物交换:学术求助行为分析

IF 4.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Pub Date : 2023-10-04 DOI:10.1080/02602938.2023.2259631
Alexander Amigud, Samira Hosseini
{"title":"合作、串通与物物交换:学术求助行为分析","authors":"Alexander Amigud, Samira Hosseini","doi":"10.1080/02602938.2023.2259631","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThis study explores the social nature of learning and discusses its implications for student assessment. To this end, we analyzed a sample of unique first-hand accounts of students seeking help with academic work, relying on the grounded theory approach for the identification of incentives for academic support (n = 807), and used time-series analysis (n = 5,637) to identify temporal trends. Our findings demonstrate an overlap in collaboration, collusion, and contact cheating practices and highlight a trade element in peer-relationships. In contrast to outsourcing of academic work to commercial providers, whereby academic support is exchanged for money, students’ tend to trade what they have available. The incentives offered in exchange for academic support included food, personal attention, money, alcohol, personal items, and sexual opportunities. The top subjects students sought help with were mathematics, history, and English. When examined on a timeline (2018–2023), the help-seeking behaviors persisted throughout the pandemic-related lockdowns; however, there was a shift toward monetary transactions. We argue that peer community can be considered an economy. Transacting with peers is more accessible, more affordable, and less risky than transacting with commercial providers. Furthermore, when students are partially involved in the production of academic work, it becomes harder to detect.Keywords: Student assessmentpeer supportcontract cheatingcollusionhelp-seekingsocial networks Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).","PeriodicalId":48267,"journal":{"name":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Collaboration, collusion, and barter-cheating: an analysis of academic help-seeking behaviors\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Amigud, Samira Hosseini\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02602938.2023.2259631\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AbstractThis study explores the social nature of learning and discusses its implications for student assessment. To this end, we analyzed a sample of unique first-hand accounts of students seeking help with academic work, relying on the grounded theory approach for the identification of incentives for academic support (n = 807), and used time-series analysis (n = 5,637) to identify temporal trends. Our findings demonstrate an overlap in collaboration, collusion, and contact cheating practices and highlight a trade element in peer-relationships. In contrast to outsourcing of academic work to commercial providers, whereby academic support is exchanged for money, students’ tend to trade what they have available. The incentives offered in exchange for academic support included food, personal attention, money, alcohol, personal items, and sexual opportunities. The top subjects students sought help with were mathematics, history, and English. When examined on a timeline (2018–2023), the help-seeking behaviors persisted throughout the pandemic-related lockdowns; however, there was a shift toward monetary transactions. We argue that peer community can be considered an economy. Transacting with peers is more accessible, more affordable, and less risky than transacting with commercial providers. Furthermore, when students are partially involved in the production of academic work, it becomes harder to detect.Keywords: Student assessmentpeer supportcontract cheatingcollusionhelp-seekingsocial networks Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).\",\"PeriodicalId\":48267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2259631\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2259631","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本研究探讨学习的社会性质,并探讨其对学生评量的影响。为此,我们分析了学生在学术工作上寻求帮助的独特第一手资料样本,依靠扎根理论方法来识别学术支持的动机(n = 807),并使用时间序列分析(n = 5637)来识别时间趋势。我们的研究结果表明,在合作、串通和联系作弊行为中存在重叠,并强调了同伴关系中的交易因素。与将学术工作外包给商业供应商(以金钱换取学术支持)相比,学生们倾向于用他们现有的东西进行交易。为换取学术支持而提供的奖励包括食物、个人关注、金钱、酒精、个人物品和性机会。学生们寻求帮助最多的科目是数学、历史和英语。在2018-2023年的时间线上进行研究时,在与大流行相关的封锁期间,寻求帮助的行为持续存在;然而,出现了向货币交易的转变。我们认为同伴社区可以被视为一种经济。与商业提供商进行交易相比,与同行进行交易更容易获得、更实惠、风险更低。此外,当学生部分参与学术工作的生产时,它变得更难被发现。关键词:学生评估同伴支持合同欺骗串通求助社交网络披露声明作者未发现潜在的利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Collaboration, collusion, and barter-cheating: an analysis of academic help-seeking behaviors
AbstractThis study explores the social nature of learning and discusses its implications for student assessment. To this end, we analyzed a sample of unique first-hand accounts of students seeking help with academic work, relying on the grounded theory approach for the identification of incentives for academic support (n = 807), and used time-series analysis (n = 5,637) to identify temporal trends. Our findings demonstrate an overlap in collaboration, collusion, and contact cheating practices and highlight a trade element in peer-relationships. In contrast to outsourcing of academic work to commercial providers, whereby academic support is exchanged for money, students’ tend to trade what they have available. The incentives offered in exchange for academic support included food, personal attention, money, alcohol, personal items, and sexual opportunities. The top subjects students sought help with were mathematics, history, and English. When examined on a timeline (2018–2023), the help-seeking behaviors persisted throughout the pandemic-related lockdowns; however, there was a shift toward monetary transactions. We argue that peer community can be considered an economy. Transacting with peers is more accessible, more affordable, and less risky than transacting with commercial providers. Furthermore, when students are partially involved in the production of academic work, it becomes harder to detect.Keywords: Student assessmentpeer supportcontract cheatingcollusionhelp-seekingsocial networks Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
15.90%
发文量
70
期刊最新文献
‘There was very little room for me to be me’: the lived tensions between assessment standardisation and student diversity Perceptions of feedback and engagement with feedback among undergraduates: an educational identities approach Feedback engagement as a multidimensional construct: a validation study Interacting with ChatGPT for internal feedback and factors affecting feedback quality Diversity of pedagogical feedback designs: results from a scoping review of feedback research in higher education
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1