首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Academic Ethics >Developing a Revised Cross-Cultural Academic Integrity Questionnaire (CCAIQ-2)
【24h】

Developing a Revised Cross-Cultural Academic Integrity Questionnaire (CCAIQ-2)

机译:制定修订的跨文化学术诚信调查表(CCAIQ-2)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Understanding and measuring levels of academic integrity within higher education institutions across the world is an important area of study in the era of educational internationalization. Developing a cross-cultural measure will undoubtedly assist in creating standardization processes and add to the discourse on cross-cultural understanding on what constitutes honest and dishonest action in the higher education context. This study has used a combination of exploratory and confirmatory factor analytical procedures to validate a previously published questionnaire, namely the cross-cultural academic integrity questionnaire (CCAIQ). Inspection of response distributions was also undertaken. Primary participants in this study were from Iran ( n  = 216), and secondary reference participants were from New Zealand ( n  = 366) and Nigeria ( n  = 330). The findings indicate that a revised questionnaire (CCAIQ-2) better represents the data obtained from all three regions. Three CCAIQ-2 domains are proposed: cheating, collusion and complying. However, the response distributions (skewness and kurtosis) indicated differences among the three groups, further suggesting that the theoretical constructs developed through factors analysis may not represent equivalence in terms of cross-cultural understanding. This research will inevitably create international debate on the measurement of integrity and how this measurement process can be used to establish internationally recognized and accountable educational regulations.
机译:在教育国际化时代,了解和衡量全球高等教育机构内部的学术诚信水平是一个重要的研究领域。毫无疑问,制定一种跨文化的措施将有助于建立标准化流程,并增加关于跨文化理解的论述,以了解什么构成了高等教育环境中诚实和不诚实的行为。这项研究使用了探索性和确认性因素分析程序的组合来验证先前发布的调查表,即跨文化学术诚信调查表(CCAIQ)。还对答复分布进行了检查。该研究的主要参与者来自伊朗(n = 216),次要参考参与者来自新西兰(n = 366)和尼日利亚(n = 330)。调查结果表明,修订后的调查表(CCAIQ-2)更好地代表了从所有三个地区获得的数据。提出了三个CCAIQ-2域:作弊,共谋和合规。但是,响应分布(偏度和峰度)表明这三组之间存在差异,这进一步表明,通过因素分析建立的理论建构可能无法代表对跨文化理解的等同性。这项研究将不可避免地引起有关完整性衡量以及如何使用该衡量过程建立国际认可和负责任的教育法规的国际辩论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号