Motivation, Academic Dishonesty, and English Achievement of

Senior High School Student in Palembang: Is There Any

Correlation?

Soni Mirizon

, Fenisya Anggraini

, Hariswan Putera Jaya

English Education Department, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia

Keywords: Correlations, motivation, academic dishonesty, english achievement.

Abstract: This study was aimed at finding out the correlation between students’ motivation and English achievement,

academic dishonesty and English achievement, motivation in learning English and academic dishonesty, the

correlation between two predictor variables (students’ motivation and academic dishonesty) and the criterion

variable (English achievement), and the contribution between two predictor variables and the criterion

variable. More than seven hundred eleventh and twelfth grade of senior high schools students in Palembang

were chosen as the sample using stratified random sampling technique. The students were asked to respond

to two questionnaires (motivation and academic dishonesty questionnaires) and to answer an English

achievement test. Pearson product moment coefficient correlation analysis and regression analysis were used

to analyze the data. The results showed that, first, the students’ motivation in learning English was

significantly correlated to their English achievement. Second, there was no significant correlation between

academic dishonesty and English achievement. Third, there was no significant correlation between students’

motivation in learning English and academic dishonesty. Forth, there was a significant correlation between

two predictor variables (students’ motivation and academic dishonesty) and the criterion variable (English

achievement). Finally, there was 8.8% contribution of predictor variables toward English achievement.

1 INTRODUCTION

English has become a lingua franca of the world in

this 21

century. Harmer (2007, p. 20) states that the

reality of a lingua franca has caused some people who

do not share the same language and for whom English

is not their mother tongue become very interested in

what actually happens when it is used as a global

language. In other words, English attracts nonnative

speakers of English around the world to learn it. They

become interested in mastering English because it can

help them communicate with global community.

Realizing this need, Indonesian education has long

made English as a compulsory subject in the curricula.

In particular, Kemendikbud (2014) has put English in

group A of obligatory subject for secondary school

students as stated in 2013 curriculum. Thus, the

objective of learning English in Indonesia is to

develop students’ skills in English in order to

communicate well using English to reach specific

literacy when they graduate from the schools.

Unfortunately, in the international measures, such as

the Education First English Proficiency Index (EF

EPI), in 2016 Indonesia was in the 32

rank from 72

countries. Meanwhile, Malaysia is in 12

rank,

Singapore is in 6

rank, Philippine is in 13

rank and

Vietnam is in 31

rank. It shows that Indonesia is still

left behind from its neighbouring countries. Besides,

Indonesian is almost categorized as the low

proficiency country. In regional and local context, it

was found that senior high school students’ English

achievement in Pekanbaru, Riau province was still in

the medium low level (Handriana, Ismail, & Mahdum,

2013). Similarly, it was also reported that there were

384 of 7,811 senior high school students failed in

English national examination in South Sumatera

(Kemdikbud, 2014). This phenomenon might be

related to the motivation that students had or other

related variable such as academic integrity.

Motivation is an energy that makes people do

something. Harmer (2007, p. 98) points out that

motivation is a strong desire that triggers somebody

to act on for the sake of accomplishing something. Al-

Mirizon, S., Anggraini, F. and Putera Jaya, H.

Motivation, Academic Dishonesty, and English Achievement of Senior High School Students in Palembang: Is There Any Correlation?.

DOI: 10.5220/0009993500002499

In Proceedings of the 3rd Sriwijaya University International Conference on Learning and Education (SULE-IC 2018), pages 5-13

ISBN: 978-989-758-575-3

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

Othman and Shuqair (2013, p. 123) state, “Motivated

learners are enthusiastic, eager to work hard,

concentrate on the tasks given, do not require constant

encouragement, willingly confront challenges, and

could even motivates others, facilitating collaborative

learning.” In similar view, Jordan (2001) asserts that

students are likely to cheat when they are only

concerned with good grades but are unwilling to do

their best effort in learning, whereas students who are

motivated to get knowledge and are interested in

doing their best efforts are not likely to cheat. It

means that the students who have higher motivation

rarely cheat their friends’ answers. Similarly, Smith,

Davy, Rosenberg, and Haight (2017) reported a study

they did to 1,747 students of three accredited business

schools. They found that motivation is positively

correlated with academic performance, while lack of

motivation is positively correlated with prior cheating.

Furthermore, Choosri and Intharaksa (2011) found

that motivation is positively related to students’

achievement in learning English. Motivation affects

students to study English for their further education

and future career. It affects the students to gain

knowledge in English so that they can achieve their

main goals to be successful in pursuing their future.

Meanwhile, Khan (2015) found that the majority of

students in Saudi Arabia are less motivated, in which

it gives impacts on their low achievement in learning

English. Similarly, Hadriana, Ismail, and Mahdum

(2013) found that the level of motivation in senior

high schools’ students in Pekanbaru, Indonesia is

merely at moderate level. This does not help the

students much in increasing their English proficiency.

Another factor is academic integrity. Academic

integrity is related to someone’s moral in dealing with

academic matters whether he or she is academically

honest or dishonest. Of the two, academic dishonesty

is assumed to give negative effects on student

learning. Academic dishonesty refers to the dishonest

behavior that happens during acquiring knowledge.

Academic dishonesty happens when academic

integrity is betrayed by things that are dishonest in

doing something. Colnerud and Rosander (2008)

state that academic dishonesty is a classic issue but

the trend changes as technology develops. Sorgo,

Vavdi, Cigler, and Kralj (2015) state that academic

dishonesty is a common term for any academic

misconduct such as cheating in an exam, copying or

falsifying one’s work, or admitting one’s work as his

or hers. Dodeen (2012) states that cheating violates

good moral values and attitudes taught at schools. It

could become a sign of school weakness in providing

equal opportunity for all students to learn.

There are many kinds of academic dishonesty, but

this paper focuses on academic dishonesty related to

cheating behaviour. Rahimi and Goli (2016) reported

that the most commonly committed academic

dishonesty is cheating in doing assignment and taking

examination. Cheating is usually done by students to

get something more than they can effort and becomes

a serious problem in many countries in the world.

Batool, Abbas and Naeemi (2011, p. 246) state,

“Cheating has always been a problem in academic

settings, and with advances in technology such as cell

phones, and more pressure for students to score well

so that they get into top rated universities, cheating

has become an epidemic”. Shipley (2016) found that

the level of self-reported cheating on an assignment

or a test was nearly 50 % in college students in

Nebraska. Therefore, cheating has become usual

thing to do when the students are having

examinations, tests and exercises in the school.

In Indonesia, cheating also becomes a serious

problem. Fredrika and Prasetyawati (2013) showed

that academic dishonesty had occurred among the 6

grader in Indonesia. It is also proved from integrity

measurement done by the Minister of Education and

Culture in Indonesia. They found the grievous fact

from the result of National Examination in 2015 that

more than 60% schools in Indonesia have low

integrity. It can be implied that dishonesty in doing

National Examination in 2015 is still high. Those are

contradictory with the spirit of Curriculum 2013

where affective factors such as confidence, courtesy,

curiosity, care, responsibility, discipline and honesty

become the core values. This study is related to one

of the values that students should have, that is honesty.

Therefore this study aims at finding out whether or

not there is any significant correlation between (1)

motivation and English achievement of senior high

schools students in Palembang, (2) academic

dishonesty and English achievement of senior high

schools students in Palembang, (3) motivation and

academic dishonesty of senior high schools students

in Palembang, (4) two predictor variables (students’

motivation and academic dishonesty) and the

criterion variable (English achievement), and (5)

whether or not there is any contribution between two

predictor variables (students’ motivation and

academic dishonesty) and the criterion variable

(English achievement).

2 RESEARCH METHOD

This study applied correlational design. Fifteen senior

high schools (6 public schools and 9 private schools)

SULE-IC 2018 - 3rd Sriwijaya University International Conference on Learning and Education

were randomly selected from 88 accredited senior

high schools; 24 state senior high schools and 64

private senior high schools in Palembang, South

Sumatera. There were 765 of Year 11 and Year 12

students out of 5,544 were taken as the sample of this

study. The data were collected using an English

achievement test and questionnaires. The test

consisted of 50 questions. Before the test was

administered, expert judgment from two validators to

check the level of appropriateness of the test was done.

The results showed that the test was appropriate to be

used. In addition, trying out the test to 56 non-sample

students of Year 11 and Year 12 of private senior high

school was also conducted. The result of validity of

the test showed that there were 50 out of 70 test items

that were valid and appropriate to be used. Since r-

obtained was higher than t-table (0.279). Therefore,

50 valid items were valid to be used and the

Cronbach’s alpha was 0.938 (at least 0.70 or more

preferable, Fraenkel & Wallen, 2012).

Two questionnaires were used. The first quest-

ionnaire, Students’ Motivation in Learning English

Questionnaire, was a ready-made questionnaire

(Wang, 2008). Each item had the validity >.45. Hair,

Black, Babin, and Anderson (2010, p.117) assert that

factor loadings of 0.30 to 0.4 are considered

minimally acceptable. The Cronbach alpha was 0.80.

The second questionnaire was about Academic

Dishonesty (developed by Simic, Sasic, & Klarin,

2009 and modified by Sorgo et. al., 2015) consisted

of 39 items. Each item had >.30 validity and 0.70

Cronbach‟s alpha.

The obtained data were analyzed quantitatively

using the Pearson Product Moment Correlation

coefficient analysis and the Regression analysis. The

former was used to see the correlation of each

variable while the latter was used to find out the

correlations among the three variables and their

contribution. The three variables were treated as

different variables. Besides, Method of Successive

Interval (MSI) was applied in order to convert ordinal

data to interval data.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Data analysis results revealed that mostly students

had high level of motivation in learning English. The

total number of the students in this category was 575

(75.16%) out of 765. Meanwhile, 178 (23.27%)

students were on high category, and only 12 (1.57%)

students were on low category level. Table 1 shows

the results of students’ motivation questionnaire in

learning English.

Table 1: Results of motivation questionnaire in learning

english.

Motivation Category N % of total N

High 178 23.27%

Moderate 575 75.16%

Low 12 1.57%

Total

765

Further details about motivation aspects in learning

English are shown in Table 2

Table 2: Descriptive statistics of aspects of motivation

questionnaire.

Motivation

Aspects

Indicators Mean Std.

Deviat

ion

Intrinsic

Motivation

for

knowledge

Motivation

to challenge

33.89

34.91

9.96

9.50

Extrinsic

Motivation

Internal

fulfilment

regulation

External

utility

regulation

36.48

27.86

9.32

10.13

The highest mean score among the aspects was

internal fulfilment regulation in extrinsic motivation

(36.48) and the standard deviation was 9.32. The

second highest mean score was motivation to

challenge in intrinsic motivation (34.91) and the

standard deviation was 9.50. The mean score of

students’ motivation for knowledge in intrinsic

motivation was 33.89 and its standard deviation was

9.96. The last, external utility regulation was 27.86

for the mean score with standard deviation (10.13).

Table 3 below presents the results of academic

dishonesty questionnaire.

Table 3: Results of academic dishonesty questionnaire.

Academic Dishonesty

Category

N % of total N

High 3 0.39 %

Moderate 265 34.64%

Low 497 64.97%

Total 765

As shown in Table 3 above, 497 (64.97%) out of 765

students were in low level of academic dishonesty.

Meanwhile, there are 265 (34.64 %) students were on

Motivation, Academic Dishonesty, and English Achievement of Senior High School Students in Palembang: Is There Any Correlation?

moderate category level of academic dishonesty, and

only 3 (0.39%) students were in high category level

of academic dishonesty. The results of English

achievement test are shown in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Results of english achievement test.

KKM Interval Predicate N

% of total

A= 93-100

B= 84-92

C= 75-83

Very Good

Good

Sufficient

0 %

0.13 %

1.18 %

D= <75 Poor 755 98.69 %

Total 765

Based on Table 4 above, 755 (98.69%) out of 765

students had poor predicate in English achievement.

Meanwhile, 9 (1.18%) students were on sufficient

predicate in English achievement, and only one

student (0.13%) was on good predicate in English

achievement. None of them was on very good

predicate in English achievement.

There are three considerations in using Pearson

product moment coefficient correlation. First, the

variables should be in interval/ ratio data. Second, the

data should be in normal distribution and another is

the total number of the sample should be at least 30

people as samples in a research. The data had been in

interval data because the questionnaires data had been

converted by using MSI (Method of Successive

Interval) and the total number of sample was 765

students. Finally, the normality of each instrument

should be fulfilled. The normality of motivation

questionnaire was the result of Kolmogorov-Smirnov

test shows that p-value is 0.200.

Because the p-value (0.200) is higher than 0.05,

the data set has the normal distribution. The normality

of academic dishonesty questionnaire was the result

of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test shows that p-value is

0.072. Because the p-value (0.072) is higher than 0.05,

the data set has the normal distribution. Besides, the

normality of English achievement test was also the

result of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test shows that p-

value is 0.000. Because the p-value (0.000) is lower

than 0.05, the data set does not have the normal

distribution, but Gani and Amalia (2015) state that if

the data does not have the normal distribution, central

limit theorem can be applied. In central limit theorem,

if the sample data is in large group (n  30),data has

been considered as normal distribution. Therefore,

the three instruments have the normal distribution.

Table 5 : Correlation between students‟ motivation and

english achievement.

Variables

(Pearson

Correlatio

F (Sig 2 –

tailed)

F < 0.05

Motivation

Engli

Achi

evem

.297 .000

As shown in Table 5, the result of correlation analysis

showed that the correlation coefficient was .297 and

the p-value was 0.000. It means that there was a slight

correlation between students’ academic dishonesty

and English achievement of senior high schools

students in Palembang. It was categorized into slight

correlation because the range of correlation between

0.20 until 0.35. The correlation was a significant

correlation because the p-value (0.000) was lower

than 0.05. Therefore, there was a significant

correlation between students’ motivation and their

English achievement of senior high schools students

in Palembang.

Table 6: Correlation between academic dishonesty and

english achievement.

Variables

(Pearson

Correlat

ion)

F (Sig 2 –

tailed)

F < 0.05

Academic

dishonesty

English

achieve

ment

-.039 .282

Referred to Table 6 above, the result of Pearson

product moment correlation coefficient test showed

that the p- value was 0.282. Because the p- value

(0.282) was higher than 0.05, H

was accepted and H

was rejected. It means that there is no significant

correlation between academic dishonesty and English

achievement of senior high schools students in

Palembang.

Table 7: Correlation between students’ motivation and

academic dishonesty.

Variables

R (Pearson

Correlation)

F (Sig 2

– tailed)

F < 0.05

Motivation

Academic

dishonesty

-.056 .121

SULE-IC 2018 - 3rd Sriwijaya University International Conference on Learning and Education

Referred to Table 7 above, the result of Pearson

product moment correlation coefficient test showed

that the p-value was 0.121. Because the p-value

(0.121) was higher than 0.05, H

was accepted and H

was rejected. It means that there is no significant

correlation between motivation and academic

dishonesty of senior high schools students in

Palembang.

Table 8: Correlation between predictor variables and the

criterion variable.

Variables

(Pearson

Correlat-

ion)

F (Sig

2 –

tailed)

F <

0.05

Pr\edictor

Variables

(Motivation

and

Academic

Dishonest

Criterion

Variable

(English

Achievem

ent)

.297 .000

As shown in Table 8, the result of regression analysis

shows that significant value (F value) is 0.000.

Because significant value (sig. F= 0.000) is lower

than 0.05, H

was rejected and H

was accepted.

Therefore, there is a significant correlation between

students‟ motivation, academic dishonesty, and

English achievement of senior high schools students

in Palembang. The correlation coefficient (0.297) was

categorized into slight correlation because the range

of correlation between 0.20 until 0.35.

Table 9: Regression Analysis: The Contribution between

Predictor Variables and the Criterion Variable

Model R R

Squar

Std.

Error of

TheEsti

mate

Squar

Chan

Sig. F

Change

1 .297

.088 15.840 .088 .000

Based on Table 9 above, it was found that R square

was 0.088 (sig F=0.000). It indicated that the

predictor variables (Motivation and academic

dishonesty) explained 8.8 % of the variability in

students’ English achievement. Stepwise regression

was also applied in order to find out which one

between motivation and academic dishonesty would

influence more to English achievement of senior high

school students. Table 20 shows the result of

Stepwise regression between the predictor variables

(Motivation and academic dishonesty) and the

criterion variable (English Achievement).

Table10: The contribution of predictor variables towards

the criterion variable

Mode

R R

Square

Std.

Error of

The

Estimate

Square

Change

Sig.

Chan

1 .297

.088 15.834 .088 .000

According to Table 10, the result showed that

between the predictor variables (motivation and

academic dishonesty), motivation became the factor

that influence more in students’ English achievement.

Meanwhile, academic dishonesty was automatically

deleted because it did not affect students’ English

achievement. Therefore, the contribution of

motivation toward English achievement was 8.8 %.

Based on these findings, several points need to be

discussed. Most of the students at senior high schools

in Palembang had high motivation in learning English.

The findings showed that more than half of the

students (75.16%) were in moderate motivation

category, 23.27% students were in high motivation

category, and only 1.57% students who had low

motivation in learning English. Thus, it can be

concluded that the motivation of senior high school

students in Palembang in learning English was in high

motivation category. High level of motivation

becomes people’s potential to perform better in doing

everything. Al-Othman and Shuqair (2013) state that

motivation level of students will affect their

willingness or desire to take part in the process of

learning.

The rank means of each aspects of motivation

indicated the further details. The mean score (36.48)

of their extrinsic motivation in terms of internal

regulation was the highest aspect. It seems that the

external factor in accomplishing the rules from

schools influenced the students in gaining knowledge

in English. It is also supported by Vallerand (2004, p.

428) that when the students get motivated externally,

they derive some kind of rewards that are external to

the activity itself. Similarly, Wang (2008) says,

“[internal fulfillment] regulation is an autonomous

motivation which means that the individual has

internalized the value and regulation of English

learning”.

The second highest mean score was motivation to

challenge in intrinsic motivation (34.91). It can be

implied that they treated English as a challenge that

made them interested to learn. Wang (2008) asserts,

“students prefer challenging tasks and hold positive

attitudes toward English examination”. The third was

students’ motivation for knowledge in intrinsic

Motivation, Academic Dishonesty, and English Achievement of Senior High School Students in Palembang: Is There Any Correlation?

motivation and the mean score was 33.89. It can be

said that they learned English because they were

curious and wanted to learn more and more. The last,

external utility regulation was 27.86 for the mean

score with standard deviation (10.13). It belongs to

extrinsic motivation which comes from outside that

influences somebody for example looking friends

who can speak English around them makes them want

to master it. Wang (2008) states, “Students with

external utility regulation learn English mainly for the

praise of the teacher, examination and graduation”.

The result of academic dishonesty questionnaire

shows that most of the students at senior high schools

in Palembang was in low category in cheating. The

finding shows that more than half of the students

(58.82%) were in low cheating category and the rest

(40.65%) was in moderate cheating category. Only

0.52 % students were on high cheating category. In

relation to this, McCabe, Trevino, and Butterfield

(2001) state that even the level of cheating was low,

it exists; therefore schools should pay attention to

academic dishonesty and set standards and means of

academic integrity, and encourage students to care

about it. Take for example the implementation of

UNBK (Ujian Nasional Berbasis Komputer,

Computer-based National Examination) that has

recently been applied in Indonesia education. It

brought positive impact to senior high schools

students. UNBK puts students in the condition that

cheating in the exam is impossible to do since they

are limited by tools and time in doing the exam where

questions displayed in each computer is not the same

from one to the other. Besides, even though most of

the students were on low cheating category, it cannot

be neglected that many other students at senior high

schools were still on moderate and high cheating

category. Therefore, the roles of schools, teachers,

and administration were important in applying

honesty in teaching and learning process.

Moreover, the result of English achievement test

showed that 755 (98.69%) out of 765 students had

poor predicate in English achievement. Meanwhile, 9

students (1.18%) were on sufficient predicate in

English achievement; and only one student (0.13%)

was on good predicate in English achievement. None

of them was in very good predicate in English

achievement. Alrabai (2016) conveys that low

achievement in English can be caused by many

factors, namely: learner-related factors, such as

motivation, attitudes, aptitude, autonomy, learning

style, learning strategies and anxiety; instruction

factors, such as teacher behaviour, practices; the

curriculum and the teaching method factors; and other

factors related to problems in educational system,

such as big classes, teachers lack of training, and

outdated technology, etc. In addition, Biggs (2001)

states that students who do not consider their learning

style, learn slower than the students who are aware of

their learning style. Besides, other factor which

affects students’ low achievement in English can also

be from the time allocated for learning. Some schools

set morning schedule, but some other schools

allocated afternoon schedule. In line with this, Obeka

(2016) confirms that the learning environment that

was not effective and conducive affects the negative

attitudes to English language subject and results poor

achievement secondary school students.

The result of students’ motivation questionnaire

in learning English and English achievement had a

significant correlation. Similarly, Ba-Udhan’s study

(2011) also found that students’ motivation and

learning outcomes in learning English was positively

correlated. Moreover, Choosri and Intharaksa (2011),

in their study of second-year vocational certificate

level Hatyai Technical college students in Thailand

also found that there was a significant positive

correlation between motivation and English

achievement. Similarly, Al-Othman and Shuqair

(2013) found that motivation helps students

improving their English language learning. Rahimi

and Karkami (2015) also found that motivation and

achievement were proven to be positively related and

motivation had a direct significant effect on students’

achievement, indicating that more motivated students

are higher achiever in English classes. Besides, the

result of motivation aspects showed significant

correlation toward English achievement. Similarly,

Wang (2008) found, in several non-English majors

students in China, that aspects such as motivation for

knowledge and motivation to challenge, of intrinsic

motivation in particular, are correlated significantly

with English achievement. In the same view, Smith,

Davy, Rosenberg, and Haight (2017) found that both

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation had significant

positive relation with academic performance.

Vallerand (2004, p. 428) points out that when

students get motivated externally, they derive some

kind of rewards that are external to the activity itself.

It can be implied that motivation influences students’

ability in learning English. It will push them to

upgrade their skill in learning English. If their

motivation is high, their desire to learn English is also

high.

The result of academic dishonesty and English

achievement did not have a significant correlation. It

means that cheating did not influence students’

English achievement. Although they cheated when

they had examination, it did not guarantee that their

SULE-IC 2018 - 3rd Sriwijaya University International Conference on Learning and Education

English achievement was high. Similarly, in their

study Rahimi and Goli (2016) found that students

who got lower score in English tended to cheat more

in language classes and instances of their cheating

varied from copying answers of an assignment,

cooperating in cheating with the help of peers, to

cheating in exams, but those did not guarantee that

they got higher score when they cheated because it

depended on whom they cheated on. It can be inferred

that students should be more confident in taking

exam and should not be tempted to commit cheating.

The result of students’ motivation questionnaire

and academic dishonesty questionnaire showed that

there was no significant correlation between students’

motivation and academic dishonesty. It means that

although they have high motivation in learning

English, it does not guarantee that they do not cheat,

but students who have high motivation in learning

English are usually more confident in taking

examination. They usually prefer not to cheat. In line

with this, Idrus, Asadi, and Mokhtar (2016) found that

there was no significant relationship between

academic dishonesty and intrinsic motivation. This

implies that students who are highly motivated in

learning English usually have low academic

dishonesty and have high academic integrity. Thus,

they commit less cheating behaviour.

The result of the analysis of the two predictor

variables (motivation and academic dishonesty) and

the criterion variable (English achievement) showed

that there was a significant correlation between them.

It means that students who had high motivation in

learning English usually had low academic

dishonesty and preferred not to cheat, but it does not

guarantee that their English achievement will be high.

In relation to this, Jordan (2001) claims, “students

who are motivated and interested in getting good

grades without deepening their knowledge of the

subject matter or concepts are more likely to cheat,

while learning-motivated students who follow rules

and regularities, are more willing to attain knowledge,

and are less likely to cheat”. In other words, the

students who had high motivation in learning would

have good grades because they were usually well-

prepared and ready to face the examination. In the

same view, Idrus, Asadi, and Mokhtar (2016) admit,

“Students who were intrinsically motivated in their

personal development significantly committed less

cheating behaviour”. They usually try to achieve

everything based on their own efforts. In addition,

Smith, Davy, Rosenberg, and Haight (2017) assert

that students who had lack of motivation or their a

motivation was higher tend to cheat in order to get the

higher score. In brief, the students who had high

motivation, followed rules and tried to gain

knowledge seriously would not be tempted to cheat.

Therefore, role of the school, administration and

teachers were important in maintaining academic

honesty at schools. In particular, teachers are

undoubtedly responsible for what happens in the

classroom during teaching and learning process. As

pointed out by Hamer (2007, p. 108) that when

teachers teach in the class, they are in charge of the

students and lead them from the front in order to be

qualified generations.

Finally, Regression analysis revealed that the

contribution of predictor variables (motivation and

academic dishonesty) toward English achievement

was 8.8 %. Meanwhile, the result of Stepwise

Regression analysis showed that motivation became

the factor that influenced more in students’ English

achievement while academic dishonesty was

automatically deleted because it did not affect

students’ English achievement. Therefore, the

contribution of motivation toward English

achievement was 8.8 %, leaving 91.2 % of

unexplained factors. In line with this, Alrabai (2016)

conveys that many variables could contribute to

students’ English achievement. In other words,

variables such as learner-related issues, EFL

instruction, and problem related to educational

system could affect students’ English achievement.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the above results and discussion some

conclusions can be drawn. First, the students’

motivation was categorized as moderate level, but

their English achievement was still in the poor

category. The students’ motivation in learning

English was significantly correlated with their

English achievement. Second, no significant

correlation was found between academic dishonesty

and English achievement. Third, no significant

correlation was also found between students’

motivation in learning English and academic

dishonesty. Fourth, a significant correlation was

found between two predictor variables (students’

motivation and academic dishonesty) and the

criterion variable (English achievement). Finally,

there was 8.8% contribution of predictor variables

toward English achievement.

Therefore, some suggestions are offered to both

students and teachers of English. First, students who

have moderate and low motivation in learning

English should be more motivated in learning English

since English is important for their future life in this

Motivation, Academic Dishonesty, and English Achievement of Senior High School Students in Palembang: Is There Any Correlation?

global era. Students who have low academic integrity

and tend to commit academic dishonest behaviour in

learning such as cheating during exam and copying

classmates’ work.. should change their behaviour

from dishonest to honest since honesty is very

important in gaining success of their lives. They

should be more confident with themselves and always

try to do their best in learning no matter how hard it

is. As the proverb says “no gain no pain”, it means

that success will only be gained through hard work,

not through dishonest behaviour. Second, teachers of

English should always try to motivate their students

to value honesty and have good integrity in learning

English, no matter how difficult it is. It is expected

that students are aware of the importance of being

honest and have good integrity in learning English. If

they are more confident in doing their best in learning,

they will not be tempted to cheat.

REFERENCES

Al Othman, F. H., & Shuqair, K. M. 2013. The impact of

motivation on English language learning in the Gulf

States. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(4),

123.

Alrabai, F. 2016. Factors underlying low achievement of

Saudi EFL learners. International Journal of English

Linguistics, 6(3), 21.

Ba – Udhan, H.S. A., 2011. Impact of Students Attitudes on

their Achievement in English: A study in the Yemeni

Context. Language in India.

Batool, S., Abbas, A., & Naeemi, Z. (2011). Cheating

behavior among undergraduate

students. International Journal of Business and Social

Science, 2(3), 246–254.

Biggs, J., 2001. The reflective institution: Assuring and

enhancing the quality of teaching and learning. Higher

Education. 41( 3), 221–238

Choosri.C.,& Intharaksa, U., 2011. Relationship between

motivation and students’ English learning achievement:

A study of the second year vocational certificate level

Hatyai Technical College students. Viewed 10

February 2015 from http://sv.libarts.psu.

ac.th/conference5/proceedings/Proceedings3/article//0

06.pdf

Gunnel Colnerud and Michael Rosander, 2008, Academic

dishonesty, ethical norms and learning, assessment and

evaluation in higher education, 34(5), 505-517.

Dodeen, H. M. 2012. Undergraduate student cheating in

exams. Damascus University Journal, 28(1), 37-55.

EF EPI., 2016. Education first English proficiency index 6

Viewed from www.ef.com/epi

Fredrika, M. A. & Prasetyawati, W., 2013. Gambaran

kecurangan pada siswa kelas 6 sekolah dasar.Jurnal FS

Universitas Indonesia.

Fraenkel, J. R., &Wallen, N. E., 2012. How to Design and

Evaluate: Research in Education. New York, NY:

McGraw-Hill Higher Education. 8

edition

Gani, I., & Amalia, S., 2015. Alatanalisis data:

Aplikasistatistik untuk penelitian bidang ekonomi dan

sosial. Yogyakarta, YYK: CV. ANDI OFFSET.

Hadriana, H., Ismail, M. A., & Mahdum, M. 2013. The

relationship between motivations and self-learning and

the English language achievement in secondary high

school students. Asian Social Science, 9(12), 36.

Hair, J.J., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E., 2010.

Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Pearson Prentice Hall. 7

edition

Harmer, J., 2007. The practice of English language

teaching. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. 4

edition

Idrus, F., Asadi, Z., & Mokhtar, N. (2016). Academic

Dishonesty and Achievement Motivation: A Delicate

Relationship. Higher Education of Social

Science, 11(1), 1-8.

Jordan, A. E. (2001). College student cheating: The role of

motivation, perceived norms, attitudes, and knowledge

of institutional policy. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 233-

247.

Kemendikbud., 2014. Laporan hasil ujian nasional tahun

2014.Pusat Penelitian Pendidikan.

Khan, M. R. 2015. Analyzing the relationship between L2

motivational selves and L2 achievement: A Saudi

perspective. International Journal of English Language

Teaching, 2(1), 68.

McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001).

Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of

research. Ethics &Behavior, 11(3), 219-232.

Obeka, N. O., (2016). The school learning environment and

students’ attitude and achievement in english

language. Res Humanit Soc Sci, 6(2), 31-37.

Rahimi, M., & Goli, A. 2016. English learning and cheating

behaviors. International Education Studies, 9(2), 81.

Rahimi, M., & Karkami, F. H. (2015). The Role of

Teachers' Classroom Discipline in Their Teaching

Effectiveness and Students' Language Learning

Motivation and Achievement: A Path Method. Iranian

Journal of Language Teaching Research, 3(1), 57-82.

Shipley, L. J. (2009). Academic and professional

dishonesty: Student views of cheating in the classroom

and on the job. Journalism & Mass Communication

Educator, 64(1), 39-53.

ŠimićŠašić, S., &Klarin, M., 2009.Varanje u

srednjimškolama u Hrvatskoji u Bosni I Hercegovini.

[Cheating in secondary schools in Croatia and Bosnia

and Herzegovina].Društvenaistraživanja.

Smith, K. J., Davy, J. A., Rosenberg.,& Haight, G. T., 2017.

The role of motivation on cheating among business

students.Journal of Academic and Business Ethics.

Šorgo, A., Vavdi, M., Cigler, U., & Kralj, M. (2015).

Opportunity Makes the Cheater: High School Students

and Academic Dishonesty. Center for Educational

Policy Studies Journal, 5(4), 67-87.

Vallerand, R.J., 2004. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in

sport.Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology.

SULE-IC 2018 - 3rd Sriwijaya University International Conference on Learning and Education

Wang, F. (2008). Motivation and English achievement: An

exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of a new

measure for Chinese students of English

learning. North American Journal of Psychology, 10(3),

633.

Motivation, Academic Dishonesty, and English Achievement of Senior High School Students in Palembang: Is There Any Correlation?