LessonsfromtheLabStudents’Thoughtson’Right’and

1、Lessons from the Lab: Students Thoughts on Right and WrongDawn Del CarloUniversity of Northern Iowa19th BCCE, Purdue UniversityAug 31, 20061OverviewSmall but growing number of reports on issues of academic dishonesty within the context of the classroom laboratoryMore cheating occurs in science, math

2、 technology and engineering classes than any other (except business)47Presentation today will include:Overview of existing literature (references available)Explanation of possible theories used to explain cheating behaviorsImplications for the classroom laboratory2Cheating in Science ClassesSurveys

3、of all students611Self-reported surveys examining the frequency of behaviorsMost focus on activities such as looking off anothers exam or copying homeworkSome included items specific to data manipulation (i.e. fudging or falsifying) Frequency of cheating ranged from 8.6% to 48%Cheating on “science w

4、ork” reported at 80% but specific tasks not delineated3Cheating in Science ClassesSurveys of Science Students5, 1214Survey instruments limited to items specific to science classroom but often excluded aspects of the laboratoryOver 75% science students reported copying or using crib notes1362% of eng

5、ineering students copied “homework or laboratory reports”1457% natural science and 64% engineering majors report falsifying lab data154Cheating in Science ClassesStudies of the Classroom Laboratory1620High School StudentsFour types of cheating behavior: making results fit, checking with classmates,

6、excluding anomalies, and making up data16, 1818% report copying or fudging data1721% report making up or data or results at science fairs19College Students20Students described goal of lab was to get “good” dataConsequently, obtaining data from another group or changing anomalous data were simply par

7、t of the process5Theories Relevant to CheatingClassroom Goal StructureSocial-cognitive theory pertaining to student motivation9, 21Goals determined by:What the student perceives is considered “successful”Views on consequences of mistakesMotivation toward classworkPerception of atmosphere22246Theorie

8、s Relevant to CheatingClassroom Goal Structure22Performance-based goalsStudents awarded for high grades compared to classmates (Bell curve)Students driven to compete with one anotherMistakes elicit anxietyUsually perceived to be out of an individuals controlMastery-based goalsGrades determined by an

9、 absolute or criterion scaleRewards given for mastery of materialMistakes treated as learning events7Theories Relevant to CheatingGoal Structure, Locus of Control, and CheatingFactors out of a students control (external locus of control) often cited as reasons for cheating7, 14, 26More cheating repo

10、rted in highly performance-based mathematics classrooms9, 21Students who feel their teachers are “unfair” cheat because it is the only means they have of controlling their situation28, 29Mastery-based classroom by definition has an internal locus of control8Theories Relevant to CheatingAttitude of N

11、eutralization30Based in sociological deviance theory and used to explain why delinquents demonstrate a sense of guilt but repeat deviant behaviorsNeutralizations (as opposed to rationalizations) occur before deviant behavior, deflecting social norms of “right” and “wrong”Consequently, the behavior i

12、s seen by the individual as acceptable9Theories Relevant to CheatingNeutralization and CheatingSelf-reported surveys measuring frequency of cheating and neutralizing attitude31, 32Students with higher neutralizing attitudes were more likely to engage in cheating behaviorsGoal Structure, Neutralizati

13、on, and Cheating33Correlated teacher pedagogical skill, goal structure, and target of blame to acceptability and likelihood of cheating (i.e. attitude of neutralization) through hypothetical vignettesPoor pedagogical skill resulted in high acceptability and likelihood of cheating regardless of goal

14、structureGoal structure of the classroom only became a factor when good pedagogical skills were illustrated by teacher10Implications for the Structure of the Classroom LaboratoryCookbook laboratory exercises with pre-determined “right answer” establish a performance-based classroomSupports moving to

15、 truly open inquiry labs34, 35Consistent with efforts of the NSF to bring authentic research experiences into undergrad curriculum36Another alternative is project-based laboratories (i.e. long term, student-guided, novel projects)36-42 and tend to be considered by students to be more “real”2011Impli

16、cations for the Structure of the Classroom LaboratoryAssessment practices also tend to contribute to a performance-based atmosphereTraditionally formal lab reports or worksheets but neither has been shown to contribute to construction of knowledge43, 44Suggest alternative assessment practices focused on the process rather than the end resultScience writing heuristic can be used as first step in transition from cookbook labs to inquiry style46-4912Implications for the Classroom LaboratoryPedagogical PracticesDevelop a reflec