Malpractice Styles of Students During Examination: Implications for School Social Work Counseling in Non-Asian Cultures

Examination malpractice poses significant challenges to most institutions of higher learning, particularly those from economically disadvantaged countries. Despite the plethora of studies that have been conducted on malpractices, few investigations have been conducted with a diverse, non-Asian sample of students in an attempt to understand the preferred malpractice styles and how they are perpetrated during examination periods. In response, surveys were administered to 120 undergraduate students from diverse Nigerian backgrounds studying allied health science courses and affiliated degree programs in Enugu State, Nigeria. Most respondents were female (78, 65.0%) and Christian students (110, 91.7%) aged 17 to 25 years. The results showed that (61, 51.0%) were admitted to the use of unwanted materials, (28, 23.3%) whispering of answers, (19, 15.8%) writing on part of the body, (7, 5.8%) unauthorized device, (4, 3.3%) financial inducement of official, and (1, 0.8%) in-personation as their preferred malpractice styles during examination. The study recommends, among others, effective ‘management’ of students’ examination supervision, strict enforcement of anti-malpractice policies, and infrastructural development in Nigerian universities. Most importantly, there should be a convincing leadership will on the part of the university management to conduct staff audits and employ qualified, licensed, and practicing school social workers to adequately manage examination sensitization and counseling interventions that will help in reducing the dishonest behavior of students. Implications for future research are also discussed.

Introduction

Examination management has received overwhelming research attention among indigenous African academic scholars and practitioners in educational research over the past few decades. Consequently, most indigenous African studies continue to focus on different strategies to improve the quality and effective management of examinations, particularly in institutions of higher learning (Rosenberget al., 2018; Sireci, 2020; Owanet al., 2023). In Nigeria, studies on examination management continue to increase (Anyanwu & Reuben, 2016; Edeet al., 2021; Owanet al., 2023). In university settings, academics are the key stakeholders who manage and coordinate the invigilation of examinations for students, and they are expected to take responsibility for curtailed malpractice before, during, and after examination assessment (Shraim, 2019; Owanet al., 2019).

Past studies have debated the different malpractice and dishonest behavior of students when writing both paper and pen and online computer-based continuous assessment and examination to obtain good grades (Aropet al., 2018; Adesina, 2020). This dishonest behavior is similar to lecturers’ examination mismanagement and unethical practice to report incidents of student malpractice before, during, and after examination (Graves, 2008). For example, a study conducted by Sundayet al. (2025) in an Allied Health Science University, Southeast, Nigeria revealed that 74.2% of the 120 undergraduate students surveyed admitted to a desire for good grades as a reason for their engagement in examination malpractice. Equally, in research conducted by Duke University in collaboration with Don McCabe reported that in the UK, 44% of the 10,000 lecturers surveyed acknowledged that students cheat in their courses, but they did not report them to the university authorities (McCabe, as cited in Graves, 2008). In another study, 40% of college students self-reported having cheated at least once in their academic history (Bender, 2021). Recently, a study conducted by Dejene (2021) in Ethiopia indicated a high prevalence of malpractice, with 80% of undergraduate students admitted to cheating during examinations. All these studies support the claim that examination malpractice is a global phenomenon among students in institutions of higher learning.

Literature review as popularly discussed various forms of examination malpractice styles which includes but not limited to; stretching neck to read or check the script of another examinee with the aim of copying (Aropet al., 2018); bringing foreign materials into examination halls (Akaranga & Ongong, 2013); candidates making financial, sexual or material inducement to invigilators or officials for undue favor, writing on a desk or chair before the examination period with the aim of referring to it during examination, and use of codes to log lecture notes or points in digital diaries or mobile phones and bringing such into the examination hall as if it is a calculator; (Shonekan & Onyechere, 1996); carrying voluminous materials (e.g. textbook) writing on the palm, lap, or any other part of the body into the examination hall (Bassey & Owan, 2020); hiring another person to come and write for a candidate to impersonation (Aishwaryaet al., 2020; John-Otumuet al., 2021). In addition, communicating answers to one another silently by whispering, sharing ideas, sitting arrangement and seat switching, asking invigilators for help, playing audio recordings with the support of earphones, use of electronic devices, and exchanging scripts have also been reported in past studies as other forms of dishonest behavior and malpractice styles (Forkuoret al., 2019; Ekpoudoet al., 2021).

Despite the consistent efforts made by most institutions of higher learning to curb malpractice and students’ dishonest behavior, little empirical research has been conducted on the malpractice styles experienced by students during examinations. Most especially, none of the cited research shows empirical findings on the preferred students’ styles of malpractice during examination with a diverse, Nigerian sample of undergraduate students in Enugu State, Southeast, Nigeria. In addition, there is a lack of information about the efforts of university leadership in the public domain regarding the need to employ qualified, licensed, and practicing school social workers to adequately manage counselling interventions that will help reduce the dishonest behavior of students. Hence, this study intends to make a significant contribution to the body of knowledge, thereby filling this gap in the literature.

The Current Study: Defining Malpractice Styles

To date, there have been some complexities surrounding students’ dishonest behavior in Nigeria, especially during examination assessments. One perceived reason is concern about addressing the recurring issues of students’ malpractice (Lefoka, 2020; Sunday,et al., 2025). In this study context, by styles, we simply mean a way of doing something, especially one that is typical of a person, group of people, or place. Therefore, malpractice refers to any wrongdoing exhibited by both students and invigilators in an examination. In other words, the term malpractice is used to describe any student’s activities before, during, or after an examination that alter or counter the established examination management rules and guidelines to gain an unfair advantage (Okwu, 2006; Maciver, 2017; Okafor, 2021). Shonekan and Onyechere (1996) pointed out that a student’s malpractice style can only be cheating in examinations. He emphasized that the style of a student cannot be forced, conferred, or bought. That is, the way in which a student cheats in an examination indicates his/her malpractice style. In conclusion, malpractice style is contingent on the personality of students.

Research Methods, Design, and Participants

The demographic population of the study consisted of 120 undergraduate students from two faculties and six departments at the Allied Health Sciences University in Enugu State, Nigeria. We understand that data collection for this type of research on academic dishonesty may be difficult (Teymouriet al., 2022). We partnered with the university examination malpractice committee and department of exams and records based on the current study criteria. Participants were selected according to the following criteria:

• must be registered as a student at the university

• must be a student who has engaged in examination malpractice at the university

• must be a student who has been invited and attended the examination malpractice disciplinary panel of the university

• must be a student who has been disciplined by the university authorities for examination malpractice

The sample for the current study included students between the ages of 17 and 25. The sample was split between males (42, 35%) and females (78, 65.0%), and comprised Christians (110, 91.7%), Muslims (7, 5.8%) and small percentage of students who identified with other religions and were categorized as “others” (3, 2.5%). With regard to secondary school education, (89, 74.2%) of the participants’ graduated from government-owned secondary schools, and (31, 25.8%) from private-owned secondary schools, and both obtained five (5) credits at their ordinary level (O’level), including English Language and Mathematics in senior school certificate examinations (SSCE) and passed other required examinations that qualified them for university education (Table I).

Table I. Demographic Characteristics of Respondents (n = 120)

Variable	Category	Frequency (n)	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	42	35.0%
	Female	78	65.0%
Age group	17–19 years	38	31.7%
	20–22 years	56	46.7%
	23–25 years	26	21.6%
Religion	Christianity	110	91.7%
	Islam	7	5.8%
	Other	3	2.5%
Type of secondary school	Government-owned	89	74.2%
	Private-owned	31	25.8%

Data for the examination of the malpractice sample were collected at the beginning of the rainy semester of the 2023/24 academic session. Approval to carry out the study was sought from the Department of Social Work and the Clinical Social Work unit of the College, where the lead author was affiliated. During data collection participants were reminded that participation was voluntary and that they could skip any questions to which they were uncomfortable responding. The lead author administered this survey. The survey took approximately 15–25 minutes to complete.

Results: Substantial Issues

Research question: What are the preferred malpractice styles often used by students during examinations, and to what extent is this behavior experienced?

Information was sought on the different students’ preferred styles of malpractice during examination. Findings from Table II revealed that 51% of respondents preferred the use of unwanted materials as their malpractice style during the examination. This forms the general opinion of the majority of the respondents. While 23.3% respondents preferred the use of whispering answers, 8% preferred writing on part of their body, 5.8% preferred the use of unauthorized devices, and 3.3% confessed that they used financial inducement of officials as their preferred malpractice style during the examination period. Only 0.8% of respondents used impersonation as a means of malpractice.

Table II. Level of Agreement on Preferred Malpractice Styles during Examination

Item	Agree n (%)	Neutral n (%)	Disagree n (%)
Use of unwanted materials	61 (51.0%)	0 (0.0%)	59 (49.0%)
Whispering answers	28 (23.3%)	5 (4.2%)	87 (72.5%)
Writing on palm/lap/body	19 (15.8%)	2 (1.7%)	99 (82.5%)
Use of unauthorized devices	7 (5.8%)	1 (0.8%)	112 (93.4%)
Financial inducement of officials	4 (3.3%)	0 (0.0%)	116 (96.7%)
Impersonation	1 (0.8%)	0 (0.0%)	119 (99.2%)

The Table III findings stated by the respondents on dishonest behavior related to malpractice styles during the examination. 50% of the respondents believed that cheating is necessary to succeed in the university academic journey which formed the majority opinion of the respondents, this corroborating the fact that 37.5% of the respondents said they felt no guilt for cheating during examination and 44.2% agreed that they would cheat again during examination, which is actually a pointer to examination conduct disorder (ECD), which should be a source of concern in the academic environment.

Table III. Level of Agreement on Students’ Dishonest Behavior Related to Malpractice styles

Item	Agree n (%)	Neutral n (%)	Disagree n (%)
I feel no guilt when I cheat during exams	45 (37.5%)	18 (15.0%)	57 (47.5%)
I would cheat again if I were not caught	53 (44.2%)	12 (10.0%)	55 (45.8%)
I believe cheating is necessary to succeed in a competitive system	60 (50.0%)	16 (13.3%)	44 (36.7%)
I have encouraged others to cheat during exams	48 (40.0%)	14 (11.7%)	58 (48.3%)
I have used emotional or material manipulation to avoid punishment	27 (22.5%)	21 (17.5%)	72 (60.0%)
I feel pressured by peers to engage in malpractice	36 (30.0%)	20 (16.7%)	64 (53%)
I am unaware of the psychological consequences of cheating	40 (33.3%)	18 (15.0%)	62 (51.7%)

AS shown in Table IV that the university social workers self-reported solutions for appropriate interventions to curb malpractice activities of students in higher institutions. Findings from the data reveal that university management should take responsibility to employ qualified school social workers for counseling followed by 85% majority opinions of the respondents; 81.7% of the responded recommended that universities enforce stricter anti-malpractice measures; 74.2% recommend the need to improve examination infrastructure for conducive learning; and 63.3% recommend that universities educate students on academic integrity.

Table IV. Level of Agreement on Respondents’ Recommended Interventions

Item	Agree n (%)	Neutral n (%)	Disagree n (%)
Employ qualified school social workers for examination sensitization and counseling	102 (85.0%)	6 (5.0%)	12 (10.0%)
Enforce stricter anti-malpractice measures	98 (81.7%)	10 (8.3%)	12 (10.0%)
Improve examination infrastructure	89 (74.2%)	15 (12.5%)	16 (13.3%)
Educate students on academic integrity	76 (63.3%)	20 (16.7%)	24 (20.0%)

Discussion

From all indications, it is certain that malpractice exist during school examinations in Nigeria. The findings from this study align with past studies by Shonekan and Onyechere (1996) and Aropet al. (2018), as well as a recent study by Owanet al. (2023), which enlisted the day-to-day malpractice activities of students in institutions of higher learning during examination periods, including the use of foreign materials, giraffing, submission of multiple examination scripts, and the use of electronic devices, as well as communication and other well-known practices of malpractice during examinations. Noteworthy also is that Universities partner with relevant agencies, and who employed professional school social workers and counsellors are more likely to have minimum engagement in examination malpractice (Olcońet al., 2023; Okere, 2025). Nevertheless, the current study has provided further evidence corresponding to the recent study by Sundayet al. (2025) that universities employing qualified professional school social workers will help to reduce the dishonest behavior of various malpractices of students during examination, but before and after examination assessment. However, only 22.5% of respondents agreed to the use of emotional or material manipulation to avoid punishment during examination. This study’s findings reveal that immense pressure from society might trigger the behavior of students to engage in malpractice during examination which complements the recent studies Jaremuset al. (2023) and Hensby and Adewumi (2024) in educational management research, as well as Sundayet al. (2025) in the field of social work.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The findings of this study reveal that malpractice styles during examinations vary and remain a critical issue among undergraduate students in Nigeria, especially those enrolled in allied health science programs. This research identified various malpractice styles, including the use of unwanted materials, whispering, writing on body parts, and impersonation. A significant number of students admitted to engaging in these dishonest behaviors, primarily because they believe that cheating is necessary to succeed in a competitive system. These trends indicate systemic challenges in examination administration, the weak enforcement of academic integrity policies, and limited psychosocial support for students. Based on these findings, the current study recommends the following:

• Universities should develop and enforce robust anti-malpractice policies that include regular monitoring and strong disciplinary measures

• Qualified, licensed, and practicing school social workers should be integrated into the university system to provide counseling and support

• Continuous training should be provided to the academic staff involved in examination supervision

• Awareness programs on academic integrity should be conducted frequently

• Adequate examination halls and secure infrastructure should be prioritized

Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research

This study is not without its own peculiar limitations. The study’s sample size and scope could not be used for generalization. We suggest that future research should conduct experimental studies using different sample populations from other parts of the world to understand the malpractice styles used by students during examinations. This study revealed that dishonest behavior among students is influenced by a range of psychological, social, and systemic factors. While the present research focuses on the prevalence and styles of malpractice, the complexity of the issue necessitates further exploration of the underlying causes and broader institutional context. Additional future research efforts aimed at developing sustainable evidence-based interventions are recommended:

• Psychosocial Dimensions of Malpractice: The findings suggest that student malpractice is not solely driven by academic pressure, but also by psychological, social, and emotional factors. Future research should explore mental health and behavioral patterns that predispose students to deviant academic behaviors.

• Role of University-Social Workers: Given the respondents’ support for counseling interventions, future studies should investigate the impact of employing licensed school social workers on students’ attitudes toward academic integrity and behavioral change.

• Institutional Variations in Malpractice: Comparative research could examine differences between institutions (e.g., public vs. private universities, urban vs. rural settings) to identify how structural, cultural, and administrative factors influence the prevalence and forms of malpractice.

• Longitudinal Interventions and Behavior Tracking: Long-term studies could assess the effectiveness of educational campaigns, counseling sessions, and disciplinary reforms on reducing malpractice and changing student behavior over time.

• Student–Lecturer Dynamics: Future research could explore lecturers’ attitudes, responses, and roles in enabling or curbing malpractice, including the ethical dilemma of underreporting dishonest behavior.

• Cultural and Religious Influences: Since the majority of respondents identified Christians, further studies should explore the role of religious values and moral teachings in shaping students’ perceptions of cheating and honesty in academic environments.

• Technology-Enabled Cheating Trends: With increasing access to digital devices, future research should examine the emerging trends of technology-assisted malpractice, especially among health science students who are expected to maintain ethical standards in professional practice.

This work was supported by the Chartered Institute of Social Work Practitioners of Nigeria (C-ISOWN).

Conflict of Interest

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they do not have any conflict of interest.