“THERE ARE ALWAYS WAYS TO CHEAT” ACADEMIC DISHONESTY STRATEGIES DURING ONLINE LEARNING

Since the implementation of online learning in various countries in the world, all educational institutions have made new learning adjustments. Universities are educational institutions that have also changed the online learning system. but online learning has an impact on academic ethical behavior. Purpose. the aims of this study is to determine the behavior of academic dishonesty when online learning is applied, besides that it also examines the strategies of nursing students majoring in academic dishonesty. Materials and methods. 150 college students participated in filling out an online academic dishonesty questionnaire and we randomly selected 5 nursing students to participate in a focus group discussion to discuss their dishonest behavior during online learning. Results. Our research shows that academic dishonesty behavior in the form of collaboration is common in online learning. In the process, student learning has strategies for committing academic fraud in various ways, including by downloading a friend’s answer file in the online system by logging in using a standard username and password that is not changed by students. In addition, the student chose to behave dishonestly by imitating his friend’s work by simply changing the name rather than trying to answer the question. and take advantage of the whatsapp group application to collaborate in cheating. Conclusions. Collaboration in academic dishonesty predominates: one way is by collaborating in online groups to cooperate with each other illegally. We describe several other forms in detail and discuss them.


Introduction
Academic dishonesty is a persistent and pervasive problem on campuses (Bolin, 2004). Many studies conducted at the tertiary level report how this unusual behavior occurs. As in previous research conducted on education science teacher students in Indonesia, which said that academic dishonesty occurred in academic assignments, midterm exams, and final semester exams (Herdian & Lestari, 2018). Cheating in academics cannot be completely eliminated. There is always a face-to-face or online examination (Elsalem et al., 2021).
As we know, learning is done online. This is because the pandemic is still ongoing in various countries in the world. policies in implementing online learning seem to be a good solution so that the implementation of education continues. However, online learning is not entirely successful, as in the process of understanding the material. Like the results of research by Sudarsana et al., (2020) in their study, students find it difficult to understand the lessons delivered by the teacher. this can be caused by the lack of involvement of students in online classes (Peled et al., 2019). In addition, recent studies say that online systems in education are prone to academic dishonesty (Golden & Kohlbeck, 2020). The results of Dejene (2021) investigation of 1246 students from public and private secondary schools, found that the majority of students were actively involved in the majority of cheating behavior academically with a prevalence rate of around 80%.
Students always have many ways to commit academic dishonesty. A new study says that one way of academic dishonesty during online exams is to open and hide browser windows during online exams to be used as a means of searching for answers on the internet, accessing images and text from cellphones or smart watches (Burgason et al., 2019). Lancaster & Cotarlan (2021) research results, explained that file sharing sites that provide services to help students in academic work have increased in demand compared to previous years. The most important thing about how to do academic dishonesty is the special skills of students in using technology (Burgason et al., 2019).
Dishonest behavior in the academic realm is behavior that cannot be denied that occurs at every level of education. Academic dishonesty is a common problem in universities around the world, leading to undesirable consequences for both students and the education system (Baran & Jonason, 2020). In colleges Academic dishonesty is a persistent and pervasive problem on campuses (Aaron U. Bolin, 2004). Even the problem of academic dishonesty is said to be a perpetual problem in higher education (Davis et al., 1992).
In essence, students consider that dishonest behavior in the academic world is a serious problem, despite the fact that students continue to commit dishonesty (Chala, 2021). Previous studies emphasized the absence of punishment for the perpetrators (Burgason et al., 2019;Park, 2003) or the absence of severe consequences (Kiekkas et al., 2020). Furthermore, in other studies, it is said that supervisors do not enforce the rules for plagiarism cases (Sierles et al., 1980). It is important to underline that punishment is an important thing to be enforced in the world of education. Among them because of the specific factors of the institution, one of which is the attitude of lecturers and administrators to related punishments (Smith et al., 2007).
The behavior of academic dishonesty has understood the demographic factors behind it (Herdian et al., 2019). Some research results suggest that children with higher IQ are more likely to cheat, children with higher socioeconomic status are more likely to cheat (Alan et al., 2019). The results of the study by Azar & Applebaum, (2020) say that more women do disagree than men, Stronger urban socioeconomic levels are associated with more cheating, Children from religious schools tend to be more honest than children from secular schools, Brown & Choong (2003) made clear that students from public universities were more likely to cheat than from private universities.
Based on the background, the aims of this study is to determine how the behavior of academic dishonesty when online learning is applied, besides that it also examines the strategies of nursing students majoring in academic dishonesty

Materials and methods
This research uses quantitative and qualitative approaches. A quantitative approach was carried out to obtain information on the phenomenon of academic dishonesty among a large number of participants, while qualitative research was carried out to obtain data on nursing students' strategies for committing academic dishonesty.

Study participants
Data retrieval was carried out in two steps. In the first step, data collection used an academic dishonesty questionnaire. A total of 150 students from private universities participated in filling out the online questionnaire. In the second step, we randomly selected 5 nursing students who had experience of committing academic dishonesty in online learning to participate in focus group discussions.
Information about Participant profile shown in table 1. Based on table 1. It can be seen that the participants from the faculty of economics and business totaled 34 students and dominated this research. While the minimum number of participants came from the faculty of literature, amounting to 1 student. Based on the semester, in the third semester there are 95 students and dominate this research, while the 5th semester students are 54 students, and the 7th semester is the least one student. Based on the GPA, the participants who had a GPA of 3.51-4.00 were 93 students and dominated this study. Meanwhile, students who have a GPA of 2.00-2.75 and <2.00, respectively, amount to 1 student and are the fewest participants. Based on sex, male participants were 45 students and female participants were 105 students, so that female participants dominated this study.

Study organization
We use quantitative data collection tools with an academic dishonesty scale by (Ampuni et al., 2020) which is compiled based on the theory of academic dishonesty by McCabe & Trevino (1993) and Stone et al. (2010). The academic dishonesty scale consists of 14 items that represent three forms of academic dishonesty, namely plagiarism, cheating and collaboration. Participants were asked to respond to statements such as: "Cheating on the test in any way" using a scale ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (very often). The results of the analysis of the validity values are 0.431 to 0.734 and the reliability is 0.899 so it can be said that the academic dishonesty scale is valid and reliable.
Qualitative data were obtained from online Focus Group Discussions (FGD) which were conducted using zoom meetings. Data collection through FGD was carried out to obtain in-depth information that could not be obtained from data collection through questionnaires. The number of FGD participants was 5 students who were randomly selected from the 150 willing participants. To maintain the confidentiality of informant data, we provided a consent sheet / informant consent to become an FGD participant. The topic of discussion in the FGD was related to academic dishonesty strategies which included forms of academic dishonesty and its causes.

Statistical analysis
Quantitative data obtained from distributing academic dishonesty scale questionnaires were analyzed descriptively to obtain an overview of academic dishonesty behavior. Meanwhile, the qualitative data obtained from the FGD were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results
We analyzed the percentage of each form of academic dishonesty committed by students. In table 4. Shows each percentage based on the choice of answers and the total score obtained as a whole.

Descriptions of academic dishonesty
We analyzed the descriptive data from questionnaires distributed online based on aspects of academic dishonesty, namely cheating, collaboration and plagiarism. Descriptive analysis was carried out by making a percentage of each form of academic dishonesty committed by students. In table 4. Shows each percentage based on the choice of answers and the total score obtained as a whole.
Based on table 4. we show the percentage description of the academic dishonesty based on the answers from the participants. The percentage in the form of plagiarism, cheating and collaboration, participants who answered "never" had a high percentage compared to other answer choices. The percentage of answer choices "often" in the form of plagiarism is 5.8%, cheating is 2.9%, and collaboration is 5.2%. While the percentage of answer choices "very often" in the form of plagiarism was 0.5%, cheating was 0.8%, collaboration was 1.3%.
The percentage based on the total score in table 4 shows the results that academic dishonesty in the form of plagiarism is 31.3%, in the form of cheating as much as 31.6%, and in the form of collaboration as much as 37.1%. This shows that the form of collaboration is the form most widely used in academic dishonesty during online classes during the pandemic

Description of FGD result data
Before explaining the results of the FGD data, we first explain how the forms of learning change. This is an introduction to the difference between online and offline learning.
Change of Task Type, As it is known that students who take nursing majors, they have to do practicum in hospitals / institutions related to health or done in nursing laboratories on campus. It is intended that students hone their skills directly. However, during online lectures, direct practicum activities are not allowed, so that the practicum is replaced with tasks that are still related to nursing cases. Based on the results of the FGD, it was found that the practical assignment was replaced by 2 types of tasks, namely by making video tutorials as a substitute for practicum in the laboratory and the task of making case scenarios as a substitute for practicum assignments in the hospital. More clearly shown in figure 1. A form of academic dishonesty in online learning, Based on the results of FGD, we made three themes of academic dishonesty in online classes, namely academic dishonesty during lectures or online class, practicum assignments and midterm or end-of-semester exams. More clearly described in table 3.
According to table 3. Forms of academic dishonesty in lectures online class include fakee presence in online lectures. Students are not included in the online class but still fill in attendance on the online system. The second form is lectures without wearing the uniform desired by the faculty. Students only use clothes that are visible in the video conference, while those that are not visible are only wearing clothes that are used daily. Students realize that this behavior may be common among conference participants, but students realize that this behavior is included in dishonesty.
The form of academic dishonesty is in practical assignments including making video tutorials by looking at notes directly. Students realize that practicum assignments in the form of making videos must be done without looking at the notes, but because they have to be sequential and students are unable to memorize them so they commit academic dishonesty. The second form is asking other people to do the task. students ask other people who are more experienced to make papers, power points to editing services if there is a revision. Students will be awarded wages ranging from Rp. 100,000., Up to or 7 USD to 17 USD to make a case.
The third form of academic dishonesty in practicum assignments is searching for cases from online search engines, one of which is Google. By using google, students can choose the desired case example. The fourth and fifth forms of academic dishonesty on practicum assignments are the same as for academic dishonesty on midterm and final semester exams, depending on the type of assignment.
The fourth form of academic dishonesty in practicum assignments is opening an online class system using a friend's account. This is done to get an answer file belonging to a friend that has been uploaded to the online class system and uploaded by students looking for answers. The fourth form of academic dishonesty in practicum assignments is by copying and pasting a friend's assignment. This is done in the form of only changing the name, changing part of it, or changing only a few of his friend's assignments.
A form of academic dishonesty during the first midterm and final exams by looking at notebooks during online ex-  Table 4. Sources of the causes of academic dishonesty when learning online

Lecturer friends Themselves
Do not understand the material because the lecturer explains not in detail The material is not explained, but the assignment is related to the material. the attitude of lecturers, such as lecturers who are too strict in lecture rules, making students underestimate academic rules Masiswa believed that his friend was cheating so he followed. Discussion regarding the method of cheating so that it is influenced to do the same Friends provide / provide answers so affected.
Get high scores so that your GPA increases There is no effort to find material, so that cheating becomes a shortcut Do not want to repeat the same course Fig. 1. different forms of practicum assignments ams, even though students realize that this is prohibited by examiners. The second form is by looking at your friends 'answers during the exam, seeing some of your answers or even copying all your friends' answers without looking at the questions. The third and fourth forms are the same as the form of academic dishonesty during practicum assignments, namely using an online class account to view answers and retrieve / download them to be copied / pasted. Causes of academic dishonesty in online classes, Based on the results of the FGD, various results were obtained regarding the factors that cause nursing students to commit academic dishonesty. We make boundaries with 3 main themes, namely based on the source of the cause from the lecturer, the source of the cause from friends, and the source of the cause from ourselves. Data is shown in table 2.
Another finding, We had a more in-depth focused discussion regarding academic dishonesty in online examinations. The results show that the cheating behavior during the exam depends on the question item. Question items that are theoretical in nature will be easy to find answers from books or other sources such as the internet. Meanwhile, if the exam questions ask students to make a case example and the lecturer wants each student to make a different case (in one class), then the solution to finding the answer is to look for answers to other students from different classes. Making a case example is considered more difficult to work on for students who do not understand the material studied during online learning. So that students try to find answers. Looking for answers is considered easier than students think to answer questions. This is because students do not want to be stressed in doing questions and look for an easier alternative, namely behaving dishonestly.
In the discussion "which one do you prefer? Online or offline learning?" three students answered that they chose online learning, because they got the advantage, namely that the GPA was increased. Meanwhile, 2 students answered that they prefer offline learning because they will get a lot of knowledge and good understanding compared to online learning.
"Exams with case questions are difficult to copy. The solution is to look for answers from other classes as a shortcut rather than thinking about the answer" "Questions that are theoretical in nature can still be searched on the power point material provided by the lecturer, or search for it on Google" "Our GPA Raised during the online exam" "We are afraid that after graduating, we will not have the expertise in our field because our understanding is very minimal. " Source: the results of the Focus Group Discussion.

Disucussion
The results of this study illustrate how forms of academic dishonesty occur during online learning for students. The result of the highest percentage of academic dishonesty is collaboration. Collaboration is defined as unauthorized cooperation between students in obtaining answers in exams. Actually, students know that collaboration is not allowed in the exam, but this happens due to many things. The results of this study support previous research by Herdian & Wahidah, (2020) which found that the tradition of cheating in cases in Indonesia is dominated by the form of collaboration. In addition, the results of the thesis research study conducted by Kurniasih et al., (2019) that the collaborative form of cheating occurs in the academic environment not only in universities but also in high schools.
These forms of dishonest behavior among students are in line with Akbulut et al. (2008) who identified five types of dishonesty that are common among undergraduate students, including fraud, plagiarism, counterfeiting, delinquency, and unauthorized assistance. Forms such as fake online class attendance, not wearing uniforms, looking at records, are part of the fraud perpetrated by students. Meanwhile, asking for help from other people is part of illegal help, and the form of opening an online class account belonging to a friend is part of delinquency.
Students use several social media tools in carrying out academic dishonesty strategies. Among them are creating a special group to discuss answers. Students can discuss their answers with each other in the social media group, so we find other forms in this case such as active students, namely giving answers and passive, namely receiving answers. This result is in accordance with the results of the description of the percentage of forms of academic dishonesty, namely collaboration that has the most percentage. Research on the use of technology in cheating behavior in online learning is actually not a new thing. This has been previously investigated by Alghamdi et al., (2016) who said that online groups such as whatsapp were used in academic dishonesty techniques.
The results of this study are in line with Hughes & Mc-Cabe, (2006) which states that academic dishonesty captures a lot of unethical student behavior, for example, seeking answers from other students' exams. Our results differ from previous research, namely the strategies used by students during online learning. This strategy is of course very dependent on students' expertise in using the system and the ability to use gadgets / laptops. The student's decision to behave dishonestly compared to thinking about answering questions or assignments given by the lecturer is a short cut and avoids stress in thinking. It has been previously explained that from a learning perspective, cheating is a strategy that functions as a cognitive shortcut (Anderman & Murdock, 2007b).
Another result of the interview stated that Students admit that the GPA increases during online learning, this is because every assignment, practicum, mid-semester and finalsemester exams are done more with dishonest behavior. But besides that, students realize that cheating behavior will make it difficult for students to carry out their work after graduating, especially in jobs in their fields. This is because the skills students have are very limited. Regarding the increased GPA during online learning, our results are in line with previous research which states that the results of learning evaluation in the form of GPA increased, based on the GPA permissions before the pandemic / offline class and after the pandemic / online class (Hilmiatussadiah, 2020). However, an increase in GPA is not in line with an increase in student knowledge in learning.
The results of this study provide a fairly important contribution in evaluating the online learning process during the pandemic in universities. The increase in GPA in online learning is a big question why online learning is more ef-fective in increasing GPA compared to offline learning. So a deeper study is needed on this matter. So that a followup question arises, namely whether students really use all their energy in learning legally or vice versa? We believe that cheating behavior is difficult to prevent or stop up to 100%. Because academic dishonesty behavior is also motivated by personality (Anderman & Murdock, 2007a), making it difficult to change that behavior (Nath & Lovaglia, 2009).

Conclusions
Academic dishonesty that occurs in tertiary institutions is a problem that always occurs from time to time. In fact, not only in class learning, but students are able to make academic dishonesty strategies in online learning. Our study examines the strategies employed by students in dishonest behavior during online learning. We think that students always have a way of committing academic dishonesty. We also found a cause that was serious enough to be discussed, namely dishonest behavior as a shortcut when students were doing academic assignments. In fact, it is not only because of confusion in answering answers, but precisely because students do not want the hassle of doing it. The weakness of this research is that it does not only examine these causes. So that in further research we suggest examining the main cause of what is called a "shortcut" in committing academic dishonesty.