Cheating violates the ethics and regulations that govern examinations. Statistics show that cheating among secondary school students has been rising gradually in Kenya in the past 30 years (Ministry of Education 2018) [10] . While extensive research exists on academic dishonesty in schools, colleges and universities, there is a limited body of research on students’ perceptions on cheating in examinations. Further, none of the available related studies in Kenya (Ochieng, 2008 [11] ; Evans & Craig, 2012 [2] ), have investigated perceptions of learners toward cheating. This study therefore sought to establish reasons why secondary school students in the selected county cheat in examinations followed by a determination of strategies of intervening on the vice. In particular, the study focuses on learners’ perceptions of the vice.

i) Why do students cheat in examinations in Kajiado County, Kenya?

ii) What strategies can be utilized to curb cheating in exams in Kajiado County, Kenya?

With the advancement in technology, cheating has become sophisticated, thus the findings may help school systems and different Stakeholders to invent strategies of detecting cheating and upholding honesty in examinations. The findings may also provide theory for future studies on cheating in examinations.

The return rate of the questionnaires was 88.5%. Ultimately, background information was sought by the researcher to establish the basis on which the respondents’ opinions were based. The background information of the students is summarized in Table 2.

From Table 2, 50.3% of the respondents were male while 49.7% were female. This would ensure balanced responses from the boys and girls. Further, more than half (58.5%) of the respondents were between the ages of 15 - 16 years, 30.2% were between the ages of 17 - 18 years, 11.3% were of age 19 - 20 years. In addition, majority 73.7% of the respondents had been admitted in the school in form one with only 26.3% of the students having transferred from other schools. Additionally, 37.3% of the students were from mixed schools, 31.6% were in girls’ and 31.1% were in boys’ schools. This implies that data collected was equally distributed amongst the different types of schools in the county.

In order to establish the reasons why some students cheat in examinations, the researcher first asked the students to indicate whether they had ever cheated in the examinations or not. The findings are as shown in Table 3.

From Table 3, the majority, 49.0% of the students agreed to having cheated in examinations while 41.0% of them indicated that they had never cheated in examinations. These findings are in line with those of Desalegn & Berhan (2015) [13] , in whose study in the US, 51% of the school’s best students alarmingly admitted to having cheated to get to the top of the class, thus, calling for very decisive measures to curb the vice before it completely gets out of hand. The researcher further sought to establish why the students had cheated and their responses are summarized in Table 4.

From Table 4, of those who admitted to having cheated, a high frequency of 70 (39.9%) did so to get good grades, while 20.8% engaged in it due to fear of failure, a further 13.9% engaged in cheating to please their parents while 9.8% cheated because they were struggling with the subject. The least (6%) cheated due to lack of revision. These findings echo the sentiments of Abedraboh (2003) [14] whose study established that main reasons as fear of examinations, desire to get high Grade Point Average (GPA), and lack of preparation. Similarly, the results are in line with those of Dodeen (2012) [15] who established that the most compelling reasons for cheating were hard courses, hard examinations, lack of enough study time, pressure from parents and teachers, improving one’s chances in life, and fear of failing an examination. These results also point at sentiments by Desalegn & Berhan (2015) [13] , who noted that students justify cheating based on poor pedagogy, testing practices, and student-teacher relationships. This implies that the goals that teachers create for their classrooms can influence cheating since interest or improvement objectives are more attainable than performance-related objectives. Thus, indeed, the main reasons for cheating are self-aggrandisement, laziness and a lack of administrative structure in manning examination. Mcabe and Trevino (2013) [16] revealed that one way of reducing cheating in examinations is making education systems less examination oriented by shifting focus to other areas of learning and students’ abilities.

Notably, most education systems tend to emphasize certification at the expense of competencies. Ultimately, the researcher thought it prudent to establish if the learners had ever been caught cheating and the results are summarized in Table 5.

The findings in Table 5 indicate that a whopping 80.0% of the students had never been caught cheating while a paltry 20.0% admitted to having been caught cheating in examinations. In comparison to the number of students that previously admitted to cheating in examination, those caught cheating were less than half of them implying that more than half of the number of students caught cheating in examinations are never caught, bringing into question the capabilities of students allowed to ascend the academic ladder and ultimately transit to the job market. This also implies that examination invigilation and supervision conducted by teachers is not effective and that cheating may be taking place under the very watchful eye of the invigilators. This validates the claim that the staff in charge of examination administration abet the malpractice. It also alludes to the claims that the staff, by omission, lends a hand in cheating and other exam malpractices. The respondents were further asked if they could cheat again after previously being caught. The findings are summarized in Figure 1.

Figure 1, rather positively, indicates that the most 65.0% of the students would not cheat again after being caught while 24.0% of the students said that they would still cheat in examinations even if previously caught. This may be due to the fact that the deterrent policies or punishments in place are not effective or stringent enough to deter students from re-engaging in cheating. Presnsky (2010) [17] pointed out that if cheating is not curbed with stringent policies, in good time, students may stop studying completely with the full knowledge that they would cheat. Accordingly, once students turn cheating into a habit, only very firm deterrent policies may stop them from cheating, hence the need for firm deterrent policies. The researcher further asked the students who had never been caught cheating to indicate the reasons why they had never been caught. The findings are summarized in Table 6 as follows.

Table 6 shows that the most, 47.7% of the students indicated that they had never been caught because they never cheated in all examinations while another 23.0% of the students indicating that they had never been caught because their teachers never invigilated the examinations. At the same time, 15.2% of the students indicated that they were careful when cheating in examinations while another 14.1% said they only cheated in a few sections of the examination. These results point to a study conducted by Prensky (2010) [17] that reveals that previously it was easier to catch exam cheats, but as a result of the widespread use of technology, students are able to cheat easily and disseminate content faster than before without notice. This calls for a lot of keenness from the part of the teacher. Anderman (2007) [18] asserts that teachers and instructors need to be very vigilant during supervision so as to help reduce cheating behaviours in students. Additionally, he observes that teachers should device simple precautions to minimize cheating.

The reasons given above also point out to the fact that examination officials do not do enough to prevent cheating. Similarly, the researcher sought to know what happened to the students caught cheating. The findings are indicated in Table 7.

From Table 7, it is evident that the most, 45.0% of the students were not sure what happened to the students who were involved in examination cheating, implying that perhaps there’s no deterrent policy in place or not made obvious to the students. A further 41.0% of the students indicated that those caught cheating in examinations were punished, which is a positive step in helping curb cheating. Ibraheem (2005) [19] underscores the need for a deterrent to dissuade students from engaging in cheating. Lack of punishment only serves to make cheating habitual amongst the students. Consequently, teachers should punish students who engage in cheating so that it is well understood that examination dishonesty has negative consequences. The results also indicate that, since students never know what happens to colleagues caught, the intended deterrence is never felt. Students and staff who aid in the irregularities should be made public and the consequences properly explained. Furthermore, the researcher sought to establish students’ general perceptions on cheating by their peers and the findings are as shown in Table 8.

Results in Table 8 show that, alarmingly, 206 (59.0%) of the students would do nothing when they see their peers cheat with 123 (35.2%) disagreeing to that fact while 20 (5.7%) not giving a response on the same. In addition, 73.8% of the students disagreed with the fact that they would confront someone who cheats in examinations. At the same time, 74 (21.5%) of the students agreed to this fact while 16 (4.7%) of them gave no response on the same. A further 173 (52.6%) of the students agreed to the fact that students would not be able to say no to a friend who asked them to cheat while 131 (39.8%) of them disagreed with the same fact. These findings are in line with Moon (2006) [20] who indicated who indicated that several environmental factors influence perceived justifiability of cheating. The factors cited included peer norms, classroom factors and facets of students’ lives outside of school. Accordingly, these factors play a role in shaping students’ attitudes towards cheating in examinations. Obiefu (2010) [21] echoes similar sentiments and states that students may look to their peers for signs regarding whether they are also cheating and if cheating is justified. Accordingly, some students cheat in order to be uniform with the group they belong to. Consequently, if the students belong to a group whose members pass examinations through cheating they end up doing the same.

Cheating in examinations has become malignant and acute and if preventive and eliminative measures are not put in place, the education system of a country like Kenya may be discredited. The researcher therefore focused on the measures put in place to curb cheating in examinations.

According to the Kenya National Examination Council (2012) [9] , there are clear guidelines on examination management to curb cheating. They include, having properly designated officials to man examinations who, if found culpable of abetting or aiding dishonesty in examinations, suffer serious career consequences. Further the Penal Code has clear penal consequences for the errant officers. Students have also been made aware of the consequences of cheating in examinations including cancellation of results, jail terms or both time and financial-resources loss.

Hence, the researcher, sought to establish the effectiveness of these measures, and why students still engage in examination malpractices. The opinion of students on the effectiveness of their internal academic dishonesty policies in their school. This information is summarized in Figure 2.

Figure 2 shows that, ironically, most (66%) of the respondents rated the effectiveness of the academic dishonesty policy as being least effective. A few (22%) thought the policy was effective while the least (12%) thought it was fairly effective. These findings echo the sentiment by Moon (2006) [20] who observed that some learning institutions may have academic dishonesty policies which no one (including the teachers) adhere to. The author further proposes that the solution to academic dishonesty should not only include methods of finding and punishing academic fraud, but also educational influences that develop personal and moral characters of students. Accordingly, this may help reduce cheating in examinations. The study further sought to establish whether the respondents thought cheating in examinations can be stopped or prevented. This information is summarized in Table 9.

From Table 9, a bare majority of 56.5% believe that cheating is a menace that can be eliminated. This may be based on the fact that the policies and consequences are not effective. This may also be due to the general attitude towards cheating by teachers, students and the general public.

The researchers also sought to establish what, according to the students, could stop or prevent cheating in examinations. The results are summarized in Figure 3.

Figure 3 shows that most (55%) of the students indicated that strict supervision by teachers could help prevent or stop cheating in examinations with a few (18%) of the respondents citing punishing offenders. These results point to the sentiments of Obiefu (2010) [21] who indicated that the situation of examination malpractice demands that stiffer measures be taken on the root causes of examination dishonesty. According to the author, if the root cause of examination malpractices is not established and addressed, all efforts will be in vain.

The results also indicate that the laxity of examination officials is the main cause of cheating. The researchers further sought from learners the measures that should be taken against the students caught cheating. Table 10 shows the results.

Table 10 shows that most, 47%, of the students indicated that students who cheat should be expelled with a further 16.4% citing the need for punishing those who cheat. This is intended to deter would-be examination cheats from engaging in the practice. In addition, only 36.7% suggested provision of guidance and counselling for students who cheat in examinations. This may be a pointer to the fact that the role of guidance and counseling in shaping values and help deter cheating has not been adequately leveraged.