Examination Malpractice and the Enforcement of University Policies: Evidence from the University of Mines and Technology, Ghana

Abstract

Examination malpractice remains a persistent challenge in higher education, particularly where expanding enrolment and institutional constraints place pressure on academic-integrity systems. This study assessed stakeholder perceptions of the effectiveness and enforcement of examination-malpractice policies at a public technical university in Ghana. Guided by deterrence, social learning and institutional perspectives, the study used a descriptive cross-sectional survey. Data were obtained from 180 respondents, comprising 140 undergraduate students selected through stratified random sampling and 40 lecturers purposively selected because of their involvement in assessment and invigilation. Structured questionnaires included closed-ended items and open-ended questions. Quantitative responses were summarised using frequencies and percentages, while open-ended responses were coded into recurrent intervention themes. All lecturer respondents reported familiarity with the institution's examination-malpractice policies. Nevertheless, lecturers frequently identified unauthorised materials or mobile phones and collusion as forms they had observed, each selected by 95.0% of respondents. Poor preparation (95.0%) and fear of failure (67.5%) were the most frequently identified contributing factors. Administrative delays (80.0%), inconsistent application of penalties (75.0%) and unclear guidelines (70.0%) were the principal reported enforcement challenges. Among students, 55.7% perceived that the policy was not applied fairly. The findings indicate that formal policy awareness does not necessarily ensure confidence in implementation. A coordinated approach combining preventive education, secure examination administration, timely and transparent case management, proportionate sanctions and academic support is therefore recommended. Because the evidence is perception-based and institution-specific, the findings should not be interpreted as verified incidence estimates or causal effects.