A Perception of Examination Malpractice and Pupil’s Academic Performance in Primary Science in Cross River State, Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus of this study was to determine perception of examination malpractice and academic performance inPrimary Science among sixth grade in Cross River State, Nigeria. In order to achieve the set objectives of thisstudy, three hypotheses were formulated and tested. Two instruments were used for data collection. They wereperception of examination malpractice questionnaire (PEMQ) and a 50-item primary science achievement test.These instruments were validated and administered to one thousand eight hundred and eighteen (1818) pupils outof sixty-eight thousand, two hundred and one (68,201) pupils in seventy (70) schools in the study population. Aproportionate stratified random sampling technique was adopted hence; the study area was stratified into threeeducational zones with different populations. The data obtained were analyzed using Pearson Product MomentCorrelation Coefficient (r), One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Independent t-test statistical tests at0.05 level of significance. The major finding of this study was that there was a significant relationship betweenpupil’s perception of examination malpractice and academic performance in primary science. Based on thefindings, it was concluded that if pupils understand the damage examination malpractice does to the educationalsystem and study adequately; it will help them to perform well in science and minimize examination malpractice.It was recommended that pupils should be made to understand the dangers of examination malpractice andculprits caught in examination should be used to set good examples for others to enable them model adequatebehaviours and study hard for their examination.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".