Resources mainpage

Print Version

Administering Secure Classroom Tests

(Includes 1992 Survey of Campus Cheating Trends)


      Companies responsible for administering national test programs have traditionally placed a heavy emphasis on security, and provided proctors with extensive administrative protocols.  In contrast, test administration resources for campus faculty are limited and it is not uncommon that exams are administered under less than ideal circumstances.  Providing a secure test administration ensures that students have a fair chance to demonstrate what they have learned and that grades are based upon valid scores.  During the spring semester of 1992, the Evaluation and Examination Service (EES) developed this technical bulletin to provide guidelines for classroom test security as a teaching resource for faculty.

      The first step in writing this guide was to determine what activities students define as cheating and subsequently, what percentage of a selected sample admitted to cheating.  To address these issues, EES administered The University of Iowa Survey of Classroom Cheating to a random sample of intact classes selected from a list of faculty who use EES scoring and duplicating services.  The data set included responses from 1265 students, 49% male and 50% female.  The sample was fairly representative of all undergraduate classes, with a slight over-representation of juniors and seniors.  For this bulletin demographic information was not used to make comparisons between identified groups.  A copy of the survey appears at the end of this bulletin (underlined numbers represent the percentage of the sample responding in each category).


Summary of Survey Results – Questions 1-17 (survey)

For items 1-17 students were presented with a list of activities and first asked whether or not they felt each activity represented cheating and, secondly, whether or not they had ever done the activity described while enrolled at The University of Iowa.  The statements were taken from instruments used in previous studies and from a pilot administration of the current survey.  It should be noted, the primary interest was in how cheating occurred, not how often individual students cheated.

      Table 1 shows the percentage of the sample agreeing that an activity represents cheating and the percentage admitting to having committed that activity at least once while enrolled at UI.  There are several observations to be made from this data:

  • Those activities that are most strongly endorsed as cheating are the least likely to be committed.  Toward the bottom of Table 1 where the endorsement rate drops, the commission rate increases.  Having a strong definition of what constitutes inappropriate behavior whether from oneself or from an outside source has an affect on commission.

  • It is much more likely for a student to cheat outside the classroom and away from direct observation.  This would support the notion that close proctoring does have an influence on what occurs during a test.  Most of the cheating by students in this sample did not occur during a test administration with the exception of “wandering eyes”.

  • Students have a strong propensity for sharing information and working together.  The highest commission rate (71%) was associated with students either asking for or sharing test information.  In addition, a large percentage have copied assignments or received help on take-home tests.  These results say something about the role take-home tests and course assignments should play in end-of-course grading.  In addition, one can expect that if a test is strung out over several hours or days, that a fair number of students have advanced knowledge of the test items.

  • Faculty and EES have to be particularly diligent in scoring tests and reporting results.  Students are reluctant to report errors made in their favor and may have a tendency to stretch the truth when tests and assignments are missed or late.

Table 1. 
Percent Agreement with Cheating Definition/Commission


Agree is Cheating

Committed at UI

Copying from another student’s test or answer sheet during an exam



Using notes on a closed book test



Taking a test for another student or having someone take a test for you



Exchanging answer sheets or papers during a test



Working out a scheme with another student to share information during a test



Buying a paper or having someone write a paper for you



Rewriting another student’s paper and turning it in as your own work



Using another person’s ideas or words without crediting the source (plagiarizing)



Using a test that was stolen by another student to study for an exam



Copying another student’s course assignment or allowing someone to copy your work



Taking or attempting to take a test book or answer sheet that was supposed to be handed back to an instructor



Falsifying or making up a bibliography



Telling an instructor a lie about illness or some other emergency when you’ve missed a test or assignment



Asking students in another section of a course for information about a test you will take at a later time or giving other students information about a test



Receiving help on a take-home test



Not telling an instructor when an error has been made in your favor in scoring a test or assignment



Turning in the same paper for more than one class



These results are not particularly surprising and are in line with studies done on other college campuses.  After responding to the checklist, students were asked to indicate activities or behaviors that they thought constituted cheating that had not been mentioned in the survey.  The student list included:

  • Friends being allowed to sit together during a test.  This was the most frequently mentioned activity, and students strongly recommended the use of random seat assignments for each test.

  • Organized groups having access to copies of the current or previous exams.  Whether or not this is actually widespread, students think members of particular groups have information in advance of tests, and rationalize cheating because they feel a need to keep up with these groups.

  • In rooms where lap boards are used students take boards home to write information on them and bring them back for the test.

  • Using more than one answer sheet and sharing information either during or after an exam.

  • A number of students commented on the use of programmable calculators to store test information.  Or allowing someone next to them to read the calculator display.

  • Switching test forms so that a neighbor has the same form.

  • Bringing in completed essays to a test.

  • Computer theft – copying or changing files.

  • Using body parts, multicolored or patterned clothing or shoes to signal answers to friends.  Baseball caps were mentioned as particularly good cover for wandering eyes.

  • Taking another students notebook or asking to copy notes for a missed day and then copying all of a person’s notes.

  • Getting friendly with an instructor or TA.


Question 18 (survey)

      Are students willing to tell an instructor if they know cheating is occurring in a class?  Seventy-six percent of the students surveyed said “No”.  When asked why they would not tell, their responses fell into four categories:



Non-acceptance of Responsibility
“It’s none of my business”
“Watching for cheaters is the instructor’s responsibility”
“I’m responsible only for myself”
“Don’t want to get involved”
“We’re all here to take care of ourselves”



Perceived Lack of Instructor/Institutional Concern
“Cheating could be minimized but most instructors just don’t care”
“Nothing is done”
“Most of the cheating I’ve seen occurs because instructors let it happen”
“Many students cheat and reporting it would not help the problem”
“Doubtful the instructor would take any action to punish the offender anyway



Very Little Risk Factor
“Teachers make it easy to cheat”
“It’s so easy, everyone is cheating”
“It’s harder to keep from cheating, than cheating”
“Cheating requires no effort on my part 80% of the time”
“Most cheat because it’s easy to do”



“Cheating is inevitable”
“There will always be people in the world who cheat and I can’t stop them all"
“Everyone does it, you have to”
“So many people cheat that you almost have to cheat to compete”


Question 19 (survey)

Why do students cheat?  Responses to this question were related to typical college stress points:  poor time management skills; pressure to perform; grade pressures; judgments made about the relevance of a course; and inability to understand the subject matter or instructor.  Twenty-five percent of the sample indicated that they had never cheated or attempted to cheat in a college class.  This small percentage is not particularly surprising since the intent of the survey was to find out how students cheat, not how frequently the average student might cheat.


Question 20-21 (survey)

Both of these questions were asked to determine how informed students are about either institutional or faculty policies related to cheating.  Over half of this sample has read the University’s policies, however few faculty appear to be defining the issue or talking about cheating in the classroom.  In the absence of a clear definition students can rationalize a very broad range of behaviors.


Question 22 (survey)

Slightly more than half of the sample felt it was worse to cheat in a major course than in a course used to fulfill a GER.  The majority of written comments questioned the value of courses not related to a student’s major course of study or interest.


Question 23 (survey)

The last item asked students to estimate the percentage of their peers at The University of Iowa that they think cheat.  Sixty-five percent felt that anywhere from fifty to over seventy-five percent of the students on this campus cheat.

The results of this survey parallel those from studies done on other campuses.  Approximately 75% of the students surveyed admitted to having committed at least one act that they define as cheating.  In no way do these results imply that academic dishonesty is a huge problem on this campus but should be used as a catalyst to provide students a positive test environment.  Writing good test items is a difficult task and the effort spent in creating fair tests and providing challenging instruction should not be negated by poor test administration practices.  For the benefit of students and faculty alike, as much effort should be put into providing secure test administrations as is put into test development.



This section of the bulletin contains suggestions and guidelines for administering secure exams.  Some of the suggestions are quite simple to incorporate into your testing procedures; others require a great deal of instructor involvement.  What will or will not work in your classroom is closely related to class size, room layout, and availability of help from support staff.  If there are measures that you use in your classes that have been particularly effective please let the staff at the Exam Service know so that we can share your ideas with other faculty.

Course Materials

Let students know in a non-threatening manner what constitutes cheating in your course and the consequences of being caught.  Discuss this information as part of the course orientation and include it in the syllabus.  Previous work has shown that cheating decreases when students are reminded of instructor standards immediately before each test or assignment (Frary, 1981).  Specify what can or cannot be done during each exam (i.e., use of books, notes, calculators, etc.).  Give clear written and verbal warnings about prohibitive behavior.  Some instructors will include a statement like the following as a part of each exam:

            Please read the following and provide your signature:

“I understand that sharing information with another student during this exam by talking, looking at someone else’s test or any other form of communication will be interpreted as evidence of cheating.  I also understand that if I am caught cheating, the result will be no credit (0 points) for this test.”

Signature ______________________________

A statement of this nature can be adapted for any test format and serves as a gentle reminder of your standards.  This method also provides the student’s signature should a question ever arise concerning impersonation.  You should be familiar with your college policies related to academic misconduct.


If it is at all feasible, students should be randomly assigned seats for each exam.  Random seat assignments circumvent prearranged plans for sharing information and help break up groups of friends.  Frary (1981) found in a five-year study that only in rare instances is substantial answer copying absent in large classes with close seating and in which a single form of a test was used.

Remember, the number one concern expressed by students in the current survey was friends being allowed to sit together.  Here are some suggestions for assigning seats:

  • The simplest method is to control the flow of students in the door and as they enter have support staff direct them to a seat, varying the assignments from front to back and side to side.  This method requires that you point to a specific seat and ask the student to sit there.  Graduate students or other faculty can help for the few minutes at the beginning of class that seating may take.  This method may require an announcement that students are not to enter the test room until the doors are opened by you or your test staff.  Controlling entry to the room is a key factor in test administration security.

  • In lecture rooms where seats are numbered, place each seat number on a 3x5 card, shuffle the cards, and hand one to each student as they enter the room.  Ask students to sit in the seat indicated on their card.  Support staff should be stationed in the room to watch for students who may attempt to switch cards.  Ask students to place their cards on their desks so that they are visible during the time that test books are being passed out.  Have students’ grid or print their seat numbers on their answer sheets or test books.  If the seats are not numbered, you can number them using a preprinted set of 3x5 cards or in smaller rooms, two sets of playing cards can be used (one for the desks and one for entering students).

  • Pre-assign (before the day of the test) seats alphabetically and use numbered test books which are distributed in a sequential pattern.  Ask students to print or sign their names on their text books.  If you pass test books out sequentially, assign seats from front to back and at the end of the test you receive test book #3 from a student whose last name begins with a “Z”, there is reason to investigate why that student was not in their assigned seat.

  • Create a random seating chart using last names.  Call off names and direct students to their seats as they enter the room.

  • In rooms where it is feasible, seat students in every other seat directly behind the person in the row ahead of them.  If you have the luxury of a large room and a small class, seat students every other seat, every other row.  This will not only cut down on information sharing, it gives students room in which to relax and feel they can look around and stretch without being accused of cheating.

  • Ask that your test books be numbered when they are duplicated and distribute them sequentially.  Always have students’ grid or write their seat number and/or test book number on their answer sheet.

  • Limit materials that can be brought into the classroom or ask that book bags be placed at the front of the room.  Do not allow students to wear baseball caps or hats during the test.

  • If you suspect that cheating is occurring, change the involved students’ seat assignments immediately or station a proctor close by.

  • In very large lecture classes investigate the possibility of scheduling several smaller rooms through Facilities Planning and administer the test in the evening.  Assign students to rooms by dividing the alphabetical class list into chunks.  Teaching assistants can serve as room proctors and should be given a list of examinees scheduled for their room and be trained in test administration procedures.

Test Books and Answer Sheets

  • Create multiple forms of a test by scrambling the items.  Form codes should be inconspicuously printed on the front of the test book.  Do not print the form code on each page of the test.  Some instructors use multiple colors for test forms; this process only makes it easier for students to spot like tests.  Multiple forms are ineffective if instructors pass the test books out in such a way that students can select a test from a stack, or have time to trade with people seated around them.  No-talking rules should be in effect while materials are being distributed and trading can be curbed by diligent proctoring.  If you are going to have your answer sheets scored by EES, there are some limits to scrambling.  If you have not used scrambled forms before please contact EES to discuss your options.

  • Test books should be counted a minimum of four times during the testing process.  Using a four step counting procedure guarantees that you have control over your test materials and if a problem arises, allows you to pinpoint where it occurred.  If you allow students to take their test books home after the exam or after scoring, these procedures are unnecessary.

      • Count the test books immediately after receiving them from the printer so that you know exactly how many you initially have in your possession.  Store the test books in a locked secure area with limited access.  Even if you have requested that your test books be numbered, you should go through them one at a time to ensure that no numbers were skipped or extra books included in your order.

      • Count the books prior to passing them out in class so that you know if any copies were removed from storage.  For multiple sections of a course each instructor should count the number of test books they receive for their room.

      • After the test books have been handed out, count the number of people testing and the number of unused test books.  These two numbers should equal your total.  If there is a discrepancy, then someone in class has been given or taken an extra test book by mistake.  In order to recover missing materials you may want to announce that you have passed out too many test books and would appreciate the return of the extras.  If gentle prodding doesn’t produce a response you will have to weigh the consequences of a stronger appeal (i.e. canceling scores from this test) against assuming that the test will be disclosed and not using the items again.

      • At the end of the test, preferably before students have left the room, count to see that all materials have been returned.

  • If you know that test books have been taken, retire that form of the test.  Future students should be provided copies of the disclosed items so that all students have access to the same study materials.  This alleviates any advantage a particular group may have gained by having access to stolen test materials.

  • Answer sheets should be treated in the same manner as test books.  Extra answer sheets can be used by students to share answers during a test or to provide answers to someone taking a test at a later time.  If you or your department keeps a stock of answer sheets on hand, they should be kept in a locked storage area.  Answer sheets can also be numbered to match test books.


Make your presence felt during the test along with trained staff.  There is a clear and strong relationship between occurrences of cheating and the number of proctors in a test room.  “Most people are deterred by the chance of getting caught, not guilt,” (Tittle and Rowe, 1973).  Proctoring also demonstrates to your students that you care about what happens in your classroom.  Proctors should walk quietly around the room to watch for possible problems and to ensure that students are using their answer sheets correctly.  Reading, correcting papers or chatting opens the door for students who might be inclined to cheat.  The key to secure test administration is people in the classroom who have been trained and know “how” to administer and proctor an exam.  Test administration procedures should be a part of TA training.

Things to look for while proctoring:

  • copying test items or answers to take out of the classroom;

  • use of crib sheets or information written on lap boards or desks or placed on the floor;

  • looking at another student’s work;

  • repetitive movements that might indicate signaling, i.e., touching shoe parts, clothing colors, body parts, etc.;

  • materials protruding from backpacks and;

  • sharing calculators or placing a calculator or phone where others can read the display.


In some classes instructors may need to positively identify students who are taking exams.  This is an issue more often in placement, certification, or proficiency types of tests administered through the Exam Service.  If there is reason to believe that impersonation may be occurring in your classes, the only way to curb this problem is by requiring positive ID of all test takers.  There are several steps that are used in national test programs that may be adaptable to your classroom.

  • Require students to show a photo ID at the test room door and cross check ID names with the class listing.

  • Require students to place a photo ID on their desk so it can be checked while test materials are being passed out.

  • Check ID, the name printed, and the name gridded on each answer sheet as they are collected at the end of the test.  It is possible for a student to grid in a different name than the one shown on their ID and printed on their answer sheet.  Only the gridded name will appear on the score roster even though it is not the actual person who took the test.

  • Ask students to provide their signatures during the first week of class on 3x5 cards.  Have students sign their answer sheets during each test.  If a question of impersonation arises, a comparison can be made of signatures.

Statistical Indicators

Several statistical methods have been developed which estimate the probability of response similarity for pairs of answer sheets in a test setting.  These methods provide indices for flagging sets of answer sheets in which response similarities would be highly unlikely without some information sharing by examinees.  Most national test companies and a few universities routinely use a statistical program to monitor answer copying.  It should be noted however that these indices should never be used as the sole determinant of cheating but as documentation to supplement direct observation by a proctor.  References for these programs are given in the bibliography. 


  • Use an item bank program to help track the number of times an item has been used and when it last appeared on a test.  The number of times an item or complete test form is used should be limited.

  • Do not hand back answer sheets to students for discussion after a test unless they are photocopied first.  This circumvents students changing answers and claiming a scoring error was made.  A better option is to request an error list from EES when your test is scored.  The error list provides each student with the items they answered incorrectly and can be used for test review instead of the answer sheet.

  • Minimize the grade impact of out-of-class projects.  Students should not be able to significantly increase their grade through take-home assignments.

  • If your exams are created on a PC or you are using an item bank, be sure students cannot access test files.

  • Have old tests and answer sheets shredded at EES.  This is a free service for test materials.  Be very careful with draft copies and test originals.

  • Minimize the offering of make-up exams and spreading the test out over several days and/or hours.  Make-up tests should not be the same as the exams administered in class.

  • Change assignments from semester to semester.  If old test copies are floating around, make them available to everyone.


This bulletin is written as a faculty resource and is a developing document.  As revisions are made we would like to include faculty experiences and practices which have been effective in classrooms on this campus.  Please forward any comments or suggestions to the Exam Service at:


Angoff, W.H. (1974).  The development of statistical indices for detecting cheaters. Journal of the American Statistical                         Association, 69, 44-9.

Cizek, G.J. (1999).  Cheating on Tests, How to Do It, Detect It, and Prevent It.  Lawrence Erlbaum Associates:                                     Mahwah, New Jersey.

Cizek, G.J. (2003).  Detecting and Preventing Classroom Cheating: Promoting Integrity in Assessment.
            Corwin Press: Thousand Oaks, California.

Collison, M. N-K., (October, 1990).  Study suggests cheating at college is on the rise.
            Chronicle of Higher Education.

Frary, R.B. (Winter 1981).  Cheating?  Teaching and Learning, Items and Issues Related
            to instruction at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, V(2), p.4.

Frary, R.B., Tideman, T.N. and Watts, T.M. (1977).  Indices of cheating on multiple-
            choice tests.  Journals of Educational Statistics, 2, 235-56.

Haines, J.V., Diekhoff, G.M., LaBeff, E.E., and Clark, R.E. (1986).  College Cheating: 
            Immaturity, lack of commitment, and the neutralizing attitude.  Research in
            Higher Education, 25(4), 342-54.

Hanson, B.A., Harris, D.J., and Brennen, R.L. (1987).  A comparison of several
            statistical methods for examining allegations of copying.  ACT Research Report
            Series, 87-15.

Houston, J.P. (1976) Amount and loci of classroom answer copying, spaced seating, and
            Alternative test forms.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 729-35.

Houston, J.P. (1983).  Alternate test forms as a means of reducing multiple-choice
            answer copying in the classroom.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 572-5.

Houston, J.P. (1986).  Classroom answer copying:  Roles of acquaintanceship and
            free versus assigned seating.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(8), 230-32.

Kibler, W.L. (November, 1992).  Cheating:  Institutions need a comprehensive plan for
            Promoting academic integrity.  Chronicle of Higher Education.

Roberts, J. (February, 1992).  Go ahead, cheat yur heart out.  Dollars and Sense.

Schneer, N.J. and Dayton, M.C. (1987).  Improved estimation of academic cheating
            behavior using the randomized response technique.  Research in Higher
            Education, 26, 61-9.

Singhal, A.C. (1982).  Factors in student dishonesty.  Psychological Reports, 51, 775-80.

Stevens, G.E., and Stevens, F.W. (1987).  Ethical inclinations of tomorrow’s managers
            revisited:  How and why students cheat.  Journal of Education for Business,
            63(1), 24-9.

Whitley, B.E. and Keith-Spiegel, P. (2002).  Academic Dishonesty An Educator’s Guide.  Lawrence Erlbaum                                     Associates: Mahwah, New Jersey.



The University of Iowa Survey of Classroom Cheating

We appreciate your honest responses to this survey.  You will not be personally identified in any way.
               If you have filled out this survey in another class, DO NOT COMPLETE A SECOND ONE.

Gender:                49%  Male                           50%  Female

Class:                    8%  Freshman      29%  Sophomore      23%  Junior      36%  Senior      3%  Graduate

______ College Major Code Number (use the following list)

               1 = Open Major    7%                          4 = Liberal Arts    50%
               2 = Business         35%                       5 = Nursing             3%
               3 = Engineering     2%                        6 = Pharmacy         1%

Check the range in which your cumulative GPA falls:

               0%   less than 1.49                            37%   2.50 to 2.99
               2%   1.50 to 1.99                               29%   3.00 to 3.49
             15%   2.00 to 2.49                              16%   3.50 to 4.00

How active are you in University or non-University activities outside of class (e.g., social groups, intramurals, athletics, clubs, fraternity, sorority, etc.)?

               18%   Very active                              29%   Minimally active
               35%   Somewhat active                    17%   Not at all active

How many hours per week do you work?

               38%   do not work
               10%   less than 10                             17%   20 – 29
               28%   10 – 19                                      7%   30 – 40

You will be responding twice to each statement in items 1 through 17.  First, put a check in either column “A” or “B” indicating whether or not you consider the activity that is described to be “cheating”.  Second, put a check in column “C” or “D” to indicate whether or not you have ever done the activity that is described while enrolled as a student at The University of Iowa.

Remember:          A = cheating                       C = You have done this at least once at the UI
                              B = not cheating                 D = You have never done this at the UI

41%        58%        71%        29%        1. Asking students in another section of a course for information about a test
  A             B             C             D               you will take at a later time or giving other students information about a test

82%        17%        60%        39%        2.  Copying another student’s course assignment or allowing someone to
  A             B             C             D                 copy your work.

90%          9%        22%        78%        3.  Using another person’s ideas or words without crediting the source
  A             B             C             D                 (plagiarizing).

98%          2%        25%        74%        4.  Copying from another student’s test or answer sheet during an exam.

Remember:          A = cheating                       C = You have done this at least once at the UI
                              B = not cheating                 D = You have never done this at the UI

25%        74%        43%        56%        5.  Not telling an instructor when an error has been made in your favor in
  A             B             C             D                scoring a test or an assignment.

98%          2%        12%        88%        6.  Using notes on a closed book test.
  A             B             C             D

98%          2%          2%        98%        7.  Taking a test for another student or having someone take a test for you.
  A             B             C             D

94%          6%        13%        87%        8.  Rewriting another student’s paper and turning it in as your own work.
  A             B             C             D

40%        58%        36%        63%        9.  Receiving help on a take-home test.
  A             B             C             D

95%          4%          5%        95%        10.  Buying a paper or having someone write a paper for you.
  A             B             C             D

56%        43%        31%        68%        11.  Telling an instructor a lie about illness or some other emergency when
  A             B             C             D                    you’ve missed a test or assignment.

24%        75%        28%        72%        12.  Turning in the same paper for more than one class.
  A             B             C             D

77%        22%        21%        78%        13.  Falsifying or making up a bibliography.
  A             B             C             D

89%        10%        13%        86%        14.  Using a test that was stolen by another student to study for an exam.
  A             B             C             D

79%        20%          5%        94%        15.  Taking or attempting to take a test book or answer sheet that was
  A             B             C             D                   supposed to be handed back to an instructor.

97%          2%          4%        95%        16.  Exchanging answer sheets or papers during a test.
  A             B             C             D

96%          3%        15%        85%        17.  Working out a scheme with another student to share information during.
  A             B             C             D                   a test.

Please list any activities or behaviors that you think are cheating that were not included in items 1 through 17.

                                                                           top link


18.  Would you notify the instructor of a course you were taking, if you knew other students were cheating?

               18%        Yes
               76%        No, because_______________________________________________________________

                                                                           top link


19.  Check any of the following that describe why you cheated or may have attempted to
       cheat in a University of Iowa course:

25%  I have never cheated or attempted to cheat     27%  Not able to understand course material

43%        Needed a better grade                                 30%  Instructors who are hard to understand

47%        Not enough time to study or prepare           10%  Pressure to keep up with others who cheat

 4%         Influence of friends                                          7%  Cheating is easier than studying

36%        Work load too heavy                                       5%  Parental pressure

24%        Unfair test questions                                       9%  Not wanting to waste time studying for a course
                                                                                                   to fulfill a General Education Requirement
 8%         Irrelevant and boring test questions              9%  Instructors don’t seem to care

____  Other reasons why you may have cheated or attempted to cheat, please specify:



                                                                           top link


20.          Have you ever read the University’s policies and penalties associated with cheating?

               57%        Yes         36%        No


21.          In the courses that you are currently taking, how many of your instructors have discussed what they consider
               cheating and the consequence of getting caught?

               33%  None           29%  About 25%       16%  Half of them        10%  About 75%      6%  All of them

                                                                           top link



22.          Is it worse to cheat in a major course than in a course to satisfy a General Education Requirement?

               57%        Yes         35%        No

                                                                           top link



23.          What percentage of students at the University of Iowa do you think cheat?

               8%  Less than 25%             19%  25%             31%  50%             21%  75%             13%  Over 75%



                                                                           top link


The University of Iowa
Evaluation and Examination Service
300 Jefferson Building