Prevalence of Educational Malpractice among University Students as Perceived by Lecturers of Delta State University, Abraka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examined the prevalence of educational malpractice among University students as perceived by lecturers of Delta State University, Abraka. Three research questions were raised to guide the study. The study is a descriptive survey research. The purposive random sampling technique was used to select a sample of 92 lecturers for the study. The instrument for this study is the questionnaire. The instrument has face and content validity through expert judgement and instrumentation. The Cronbach alpha procedure was used to assess the internal consistency of the items. The value obtained was .73. The results revealed that there is a high prevalence of educational malpractice among undergraduates of Delta State University, Abraka. The findings also revealed that there is no significant difference between lecturers in their perception of the prevalence of educational malpractice among students. Lastly, the result showed that the status of lecturers has no impact on their perception of the prevalence of educational malpractice among students. Implications for counselling practice and education were discussed.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".