Examination of Faculty of Sports Sciences Students’ Unethical Behaviours In-classroom: A Mixed Research Approach

Emrah Aslan & Aynur Yılmaz

doi:https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2021.373.8

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2021, Vol. 16(3) 127-149

Examination of Faculty of Sports Sciences Students’ Unethical Behaviours In-classroom: A Mixed Research Approach

Emrah Aslan & Aynur Yılmaz

pp. 127 - 149 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2021.373.8 | Manu. Number: MANU-2104-04-0006

Published online: September 20, 2021 | Number of Views: 74 | Number of Download: 432

Save PDF

Abstract

This study aims to determine the level of unethical behaviours (UBs) of students studying in the field of sports sciences. In this research, the explanatory sequential design was used for mixed research approaches where quantitative and qualitative data collection tools were used. The quantitative part of the study attended 465 Sports Science Faculty students in Kirikkale University during the fall semester of 2017-2018 academic year. Following the quantitative research qualitative data were obtained with five scenarios prepared by the researchers. As a result of the research, it was seen that UBs differ according to gender, class level, and the department of education. In the scenarios presented in the qualitative section of the research, it was determined that students who have higher Unethical Behaviours Climate Scale (UBCS) scores tend to apply more sanctions to the students when they are teachers. It has been observed that male students are more likely to have UBs than women. Not using technological tools in the lessons was defined as UB. The results of the study showed that the source of student UBs could be the teachers or the students themselves.

Keywords: College Student, Content Analysis, Media Tools, Scenario, Unethical Behavior

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Aslan, E. & Yilmaz, A. (2021). Examination of Faculty of Sports Sciences Students’ Unethical Behaviours In-classroom: A Mixed Research Approach . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(3), 127-149. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2021.373.8

Harvard
Aslan, E. and Yilmaz, A. (2021). Examination of Faculty of Sports Sciences Students’ Unethical Behaviours In-classroom: A Mixed Research Approach . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(3), pp. 127-149.

Chicago 16th edition
Aslan, Emrah and Aynur Yilmaz (2021). "Examination of Faculty of Sports Sciences Students’ Unethical Behaviours In-classroom: A Mixed Research Approach ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 16 (3):127-149. doi:10.29329/epasr.2021.373.8.

References

Altınkurt, Y., & Yılmaz, K. (2011). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlerin mesleki etik dışı davranışlar ile ilgili görüşleri. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(22), 113-128. [Google Scholar]
Birtch, T. A., & Chiang, F. F. (2014). The influence of business school’s ethical climate on students’ unethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(2), 283-294. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1795-y [Google Scholar]
Borkowski, S. C., & Ugras, Y. J. (2004). The ethical attitudes of students as a function of age, sex and experience. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(12), 961–979. [Google Scholar]
Bozdoğan, A. E., & Öztürk, Ç. (2008). Why do teacher’ candidates cheat? İlköğretim Online, 7(1), 141-149. [Google Scholar]
Buckley, M. R., Wiese, D. S., & Harvey, M. G. (1998). An investigation into the dimensions of unethical behavior. Journal of Education for Business, 73(5), 284-290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08832329809601646 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
Erdem, A., R. (2012). Sınıf disiplini ve kuralları. Sarpkaya, R., (Ed), Sınıf Yönetimi (2. baskı) içinde (81-116). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
Erdem, F., Ömüriş, E., Öz, Ö., Boz, H., Özmen, M., & Kubat, U. (2014). Öğretim elemanlarının etik sorumlulukları üzerine üniversite öğrencilerinin algılamaları. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(1), 38-63. DOI: 10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.2s2m [Google Scholar]
Erdoğan, M., Kurşun, E., Şişman, G. T., Saltan, F., Gök, A., & Yıldız, İ. (2010). Sınıf yönetimi ve sınıfiçi disiplin problemleri, nedenleri ve çözüm önerileri üzerine nitel bir araştırma: Bilişim teknolojileri dersi örneği. Kuramdan Uygulamaya Eğitim Bilimleri, 10(2), 853-891. [Google Scholar]
Filiz, S.B. (2011). İletişim ve etkileşim. Özdemir, M. Ç. (Ed.), Sınıf yönetimi (Geliştirilmiş 2. baskı) içinde (125-154). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
Glesne, C. (2012). Nitel araştırmaya giriş. (A. Ersoyve P. Yalçınoğlu, Çev.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
Güven, S., & Akdağ, M. (2002). İlköğretim ikinci kademe öğretmenlerinin sınıf yönetimi etkinliklerine ilişkin öğrenci algıları. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 29(29), 69-80. [Google Scholar]
Hilbert, G. A. (1988). Moral development and unethical behavior among nursing students. Journal of Professional Nursing, 4(3), 163–167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S8755-7223(88)80133-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Lau, C. L. (2010). A step forward: Ethics education matters!. Journal of Business Ethics, 92(4), 565-584. [Google Scholar]
Memişoğlu, A. P. (2005). Sınıf ortamında istenmeyen davranışlara yol açan öğretmen davranışları. Çağdaş Eğitim, 30(323), 32-39. [Google Scholar]
Mengi, A. (2017). Sınıfiçi etik dışı davranış düzeyi belirleme ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışması. Electronic Turkish Studies, 12(25), 535-560. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.12335 [Google Scholar]
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative date analysis (second edition). United Kingdom: Sage pub. [Google Scholar]
Piff, P. K., Stancato, D. M., Côté, S., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Keltner, D. (2012). Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(11), 4086-4091. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118373109 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Schweitzer, M. E., Ordóñez, L., & Douma, B. (2004). Goal setting as a motivator of unethical behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 422-432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/20159591 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Sims, H. P. (1978). Some determinants of unethical decision behavior: An experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(4), 451-457. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.63.4.451 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Tang, T. L. P., & Chen, Y. J. (2008). Intelligence vs. wisdom: The love of money, Machiavellianism, and unethical behavior across college major and gender. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 1-26. [Google Scholar]
Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Editorial: The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 3-7. DOI: 10.1177/2345678906293042 [Google Scholar]
Türk Dil Kurumu (TDK) (2011). Büyük Türkçe Sözlük. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayını. [Google Scholar]
Witt, P. L. (2016). Communication and learning. Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. [Google Scholar]
Yadav, H., Jegasothy, R., Ramakrishnappa, S., Mohanraj, J., & Senan, P. (2019). Unethical behavior and professionalism among medical students in a private medical university in Malaysia. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), 1-5 [Google Scholar]
Yıldırım, N. (2012). Sınıfın fiziksel düzenini oluşturma. Sarpkaya, R., (Ed), Sınıf Yönetimi (2. baskı) içinde (59-80). Ankara: AnıYayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitelar aştırma yöntemleri (8.Baskı). Ankara: SeçkinYayınları. [Google Scholar]

Volume 16 Issue 3

September 2021

All Articles