Behavior of Students in the Presence or Absence of the Teacher: A Comparative Analysis

Behavior of Students in the Presence or Absence of the Teacher: A Comparative Analysis

Harriet Claire B. Pastolero^1*, Atty. Velessa Jane N. Dulin, PhD²

¹Libertad National High School, Surallah, South Cotabato, Philippines

²Sultan Kudarat State University, Isulan, Sultan Kudarat, Philippines

^*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12040008

Received: 08 April 2025; Accepted: 16 April 2025; Published: 28 April 2025

ABSTRACT

Managing students’ behavior during assessments can be especially tough for teachers, since many students feel extra stress and anxiety about performing well. This pressure can cause them to act out in different ways, like becoming restless, shutting down, or worst resorts to cheating. This study examined students’ perceptions of mathematics assessments and their experiences during while taking the test. It specifically analyzed how students’ behaviors, both students under Science Technology and Engineering Curriculum and students under K to 12 curriculums, differ in the presence and absence of a teacher, identifying significant differences in both behavior and assessment scores. Data were systematically collected using observation sheets to document student behaviors while answering three assessment tests; (1) formative assessment, (2) summative assessment, (3) quarterly assessment. Focus group discussions (FGD) were also used to elicit insights into their perceptions and experiences. Findings indicate that students view mathematics assessment as difficult due to complex solution, multi-step processes and formulas to be memorized. Student-participants exhibit different sets of behavior and adherence to academic integrity depending on teacher supervision. Results also showed that students are more committed to the assessment task and demonstrate higher levels of integrity when a teacher is present. Conversely, the absence of a teacher is mostly associated with academic dishonesty in all types of assessment tests. T dependent -test results on scores of assessment tests showed that there is significant increase on both STE and regular sections in formative and summative tests. These findings underscore the importance of teacher oversight in influencing student behavior and performance during assessment period. The study provides recommendations for teachers to consistently present during assessment period and enhance assessment strategies aiming to improve fairness and honesty. Moreover, strict implementation of rules regarding academic dishonesty in school is also recommended.

Keywords: Students’ Behavior, Mathematics Assessment, Presence of Teacher, Absence of Teacher, Cheating

INTRODUCTION

Student behavior varies widely, especially during assessment periods. Some students remain focused and confident, effectively managing their time, while others struggle with anxiety and distraction, leading to cognitive and behavioral challenges. These differences raise important questions about the factors that influence how students respond to assessments. Gaining a deeper understanding of these behavioral patterns is essential for developing strategies that support academic performance during assessment period.

Today, managing student behavior remains a significant challenge for educators worldwide (Dimacangun & Sambo, 2024). Studies show that teachers often spend a substantial amount of their time addressing disruptive behavior instead of focusing on instruction (Yazlik, 2017). Additionally, research originally conducted by Pagani et al. (2001) suggests that restraint-based discipline can worsen behavior, leading to more disruption and inattentiveness over time (Gaytos, 2019).

Cheating is a common behavioral issue during assessment period often driven by the intense pressure to achieve high academic performance which students may equate high grades with intelligence, leading them to engage in dishonest practices. (Lacanlale, Manalaysay, & Francisco, 2022). Various factors contribute to this behavior, such as pressure to excel, parental expectations, job concerns, low self-esteem, and lack of supervision. Additionally, difficult subjects like Science, Mathematics, and English, combined with minimal oversight during exams, can create an environment where cheating feels both tempting and normalized (Khodabakhshzadehs & Shoahosseini, 2021; Diego, 2017).

The issue of academic dishonesty is not limited to college students rather it is also becoming increasingly common among secondary school learners (Diego, 2017). In junior high school, cheating often manifests as copying answers or collaborating without permission during tests and quizzes (Pramadi, Pali, Hanurawan, & Atmoko, 2017). This raises concerns about the long-term effects of disciplinary measures in educational settings and emphasizes the need for more effective behavior management strategies. Educators must explore better ways to assess students while minimizing cheating and promoting academic integrity.

Research on student behavior has primarily focused on the perspectives of teachers and students (Chen, 2021; Yazlik, 2017); its relationship to academic achievement (Dulay, 2020; Dagogo, 2020; Maulida & Kariyam, 2017; Kassarning et al., 2018; Jebaseelan & Amirtha, 2016; Dimacungan & Sambo, 2024). Additional studies have explored the effects of implementing positive reinforcement (Hakilunen, Auvinen & Korhonen, 2015) and negative reinforcement (Cardarella et al., 2021), the basis for interventions (Villanueva and David, 2020), and gender differences in behavior (Parajuli & Thapa, 2017). However, these behaviors have mainly been observed during teaching and learning processes specifically during class discussion only, while they are often overlooked during assessments. Furthermore, the impact of the teacher’s presence or absence during assessments has not been adequately considered in these studies.

With these gaps in research, this study aims to investigate students’ behavior during assessments. It seeks to understand their perceptions and experiences while taking tests, as well as examine how the presence or absence of a subject teacher influences their behavior and performance in mathematics.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study employed a mixed methodology particularly exploratory sequential design (Creswell, 2003). In an exploratory design, qualitative data is first gathered and examined, and themes are then utilized to guide the creation of a quantitative instrument to further investigate the research problem (Berman, 2017). This study will begin to collect qualitative data by Focus Group Discussion. This will be conducted to gather more detailed information about their perception on mathematics assessment and as well as their experiences during assessment period. It will be followed by observing students’ behavior while answering three mathematics assessments considering 2 situations: (1) students will answer their assessment tests with the presence of a teacher (2) students will answer their assessment tests with the absence of a teacher. Following the analysis of the information gathered through observation and FGD, a quantitative approach will then be conducted. A t- test dependent will be applied utilizing the scores obtained by the students during assessment period. The study of qualitative and quantitative findings will then be compared, along with their relationships to one another, in a subsequent comparison analysis.

Research Locale

The study was conducted at Libertad National High School, Surallah, South Cotabato. It is one of the mega schools in the division of South Cotabato and has one of the largest populations in terms of teachers employed as well the students catered by the school. Aside from K to 12 Curriculum, this school offers different sets of programs that would cater students’ diversity and population like Science Technology and Engineering (STE) Program which focuses on subjects like Science, English and Math, Special Program for Journalism (SPJ), Special Program for Arts (SPA) and Special Program for Sports (SPS).

Given the diversity and population size of Libertad National High School, it serves as an ideal setting for this study. Its varied student body provides a rich and relevant context for exploring the student’s behavior, making the findings more meaningful and applicable to similar educational environments.

Research Participants

The respondents of this study were the thirty-three (33) students taken from the population of the Grade 8 STE and fifty-one (51) Regular students that are officially enrolled in the School Year 2023-2024. The researcher selected one section where the respondents were chosen particularly in the Science, Technology and Engineering (STE) students. These high-level students are required to maintain a grade in order to continue in the curriculum. For major subjects like English, Math, and Science, they must have maintained the grades of 85 or above; for minor subjects like Filipino, Araling Panlipunan, Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao, and MAPEH, they must have kept the grades of 83 or higher. The researcher believed that because of this grade requirement, it is possible that STE students are under more pressure to meet the demands and challenges placed on them academically than non-STE students (Bene et al., 2021) making them the ideal respondents for the study. The researcher also selected one section in the Regular Class which is Heterogeneous students which would likely take assessment lightly because of their notion that they would still pass even they do not perform well in the school (Gaytos, 2019).

Research Instrument

In this study, the data were gathered using three instruments: (1) Observation sheet, (2) Focused Group Discussion (3) Assessment Tests. In the first instrument, the researcher keenly observed student’s behavior when taking their assessment in two scenarios (a) when the teacher is present and (2) when the teacher is absent. Behaviors during this period was then recorded using a video recorder and listed in the said Observation sheet. Behaviors listed in Observation sheets were based on the findings of the Janke & Daumiller (2019) and McCabe et.al (2001), Northumbria University (2013) as cited in the study conducted by Diego (2017).

The researcher used Focused Group Discussion guide questions which were validated by experts.  Focus Group Discussion is a qualitative method which engage a unique group of people in terms of their makeup, size, goal, and method (Kamugisha, 2021). This method is important in this study in order to gain a deeper knowledge of their perspectives on math assessment, as well as their experiences and behaviors during the administration of the mathematics assessment test.

In the third instrument, the researcher used different type of assessment. In formative type of assessment, the teacher will provide 8 -item test and conduct the assessment test right after the discussion. In summative assessment Test, the researcher will provide a 9 – item test and will be administered at the end of a chapter or a unit. In terms of Quarterly Assessment, a 30- item Multiple Choice Test will be used. This test is adapted from the standardized test constructed by identified teachers who are expert in the field of Mathematics in the Division of South Cotabato.  The instrument is constructed to have a unified test questions every quarter in the aforementioned Division.

Data Gathering Procedure

A letter of permission was sent to the Schools Division Superintendent of South Cotabato and to principal of Libertad National High School for the conduct of the study. One section of the Grade 8 STE Classes composing 33 students and one section in the regular classes composing 51 students were the respondents of this study. All students in these two particular sections were given three assessments for the whole duration of the Fourth Quarter.

Formative test, Summative test and Quarterly assessment that were given into the respondents. These assessments were administered first without the presence of the teacher and then, the same type of assessment was administered with the presence of the teacher. In each situation presented, the researcher prepared a video recorder and observation sheet to list all the behavior shown by the students during the conduct of different assessment test.

In conducting the FGD, the researcher then invited 7 students from STE and 7 students from Regular sections as respondents. This was used to have in-depth conversation about their perception of mathematics assessment and their experiences while taking the test of the two different classes. Qualitative data was then analyzed. The researcher then checked the two sets of assessment and record the scores of the students. Using the scores obtained by the students during the assessment, a t- test dependent was utilized to determine the significant difference between two scores. The results of the qualitative and quantitative study were compared, and the researcher determined how the two findings connect to one another.

Ethical Considerations

This study is built on a strong foundation of ethical responsibility to ensure that everything is done with care, fairness, and respect for everyone involved. It’s designed to offer meaningful insights that can help teachers and education leaders better understand student behavior during assessments and find ways to improve teaching practices. Because the participants are minors, the researcher made sure their parents or guardians give clear permission before anything begins. Students’ comfort, safety, and privacy was carefully protected throughout the process, and any information collected will be kept strictly confidential. Everyone will be treated fairly, and the study will be carried out using proper tools and resources, with guidance from experienced researchers. Most importantly, the researcher is committed to handling every step of the study with honesty, professionalism, and genuine concern for the well-being of the students.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Perception of Students on Mathematics Assessment

Student- participants view Mathematics assessments with the same level of apprehension they feel toward the subject itself, primarily due to the complex nature of problem-solving and the deep understanding required to answer questions correctly. As one student put it, “It needs deep understanding” (Student F), echoing Diego’s (2017) claim that Mathematics is one of the most challenging subjects in junior high school.

Students perceive Mathematics assessments as essential to their academic performance, knowing that even a single low score can heavily impact their overall grade. According to the DepEd K–12 grading system, written outputs like quizzes and summative tests contribute 40% to the final grade, making each assessment a crucial factor in passing or excelling in the subject. This is especially true for students in specialized programs such as the STE program, where maintaining a minimum grade of 85 in core subjects is mandatory. For these students, high scores are more than just numbers, they symbolize academic competence, influence class rank, and serve as gateways to scholarships or prestigious schools (Diego, 2017).

Mathematics assessments significantly affect students’ emotional states, especially among those in the STE program, who face intense academic pressure due to high performance expectations and heavier subject loads. Many students feel overwhelmed despite preparing well, driven by a fear of underperformance (Khodabakshzadehs & Shoahosseini, 2021). The desire to excel and secure a better future makes every test feel consequential, while low scores often result in frustration, sadness, or self-blame. Conversely, high scores offer a sense of fulfillment, reinforcing the belief that hard work pays off, a mindset aligned with positive academic behaviors (Sanchal & Sharma, 2017).

Regular students, on the other hand, experience less pressure and may adopt a more relaxed attitude, sometimes depending on peers for answers rather than preparing independently. The fear of failure, especially in high-stakes exams, contributes to heightened anxiety, with students like Student I admitting worry over questions they might not know reflecting findings by Yu et al. (2015). Such emotional strain is further intensified when academic performance is tied to program retention, as in STE, where low scores can jeopardize their future (Bene et al., 2021).

Some students, like Student G from the STE program, have a more relaxed and accepting attitude when it comes to their assessment scores. Instead of feeling defeated or overly stressed about low marks, they try to keep things in perspective. Student G candidly shared that he doesn’t let a disappointing grade shake his confidence. He added, “I will study hard next time” reflecting a healthy, forward-looking attitude. These students choose to see every test as a stepping stone, learning from their mistakes, adjusting their strategies, and coming back stronger next time. It’s a mindset rooted in resilience, self-awareness, and quiet determination to improve at their own pace.

Parental expectations significantly shape how students view academic assessments. While some parents offer emotional support and encourage balance, others react strongly to poor performance, as seen in Student L’s experience of being scolded for not studying. Students from the STE program shared that although their parents don’t demand perfect scores, they still feel the pressure to do well. Some parents use rewards like outings or gadgets to motivate their children, while others address low scores through grounding or gentle guidance. These varying approaches influence students’ stress levels, study habits, and motivation (Alam Said et al., 2018).

Narrative of Student’s Experiences

Many students, both from regular and STE classes, admit to feeling intense nervousness during exams, sometimes to the point of experiencing mental blocks. This type of anxiety can overshadow even well-prepared minds, causing students to forget what they studied or fumble with problem-solving steps. Often, it’s only after submitting their papers that they remember the correct answers, leading to regret or self-blame. This aligns with research indicating that exams can contribute to emotional distress and are frequently viewed as stressful due to factors such as cramming and high-pressure situations (Methkal et al., 2020; Yu et al., 2015). These emotional responses don’t just impact performance rather they can chip away at students’ confidence, making them question their abilities even when they’ve worked hard.

On the other hand, students feel an uplifting sense of reward and validation when the exam reflects the topics they studied. It’s a moment where all the sleepless nights, focused review sessions, and memorization pay off. When their preparation aligns with what actually appears on the test, it reassures them that their efforts weren’t in vain. By reinforcing positive behaviors, educators can help build students’ confidence and sustain their motivation to engage academically (Alam Said et al., 2018). This sense of alignment not only relieves stress but also builds trust in their study habits, making assessments feel like milestones of achievement rather than mere hurdles.

Some students, like Student M, openly admit that while they initially try to solve problems during assessments, they often end up finding it easier to just copy from classmates. This reflects a mindset shaped by either academic disengagement or a lack of confidence in their own abilities. Students who lack motivation or a connection to the subject often view assessments as obstacles rather than opportunities for learning (Methkal et al., 2020). Rather than preparing in advance, they tend to rely on peers for answers, which ultimately hinders their personal development

When students face difficulties during assessments, many resort to academic dishonesty as a coping mechanism. This behavior can arise from time pressure, lack of preparation, or feelings of inadequacy, pushing students to look for shortcuts rather than attempting to solve the problem themselves. Unpreparedness and stress significantly increase the likelihood of cheating, as students fear failure and prioritize grades over academic integrity (Diego, 2017). Common forms of cheating include peeking at a peer’s paper, asking for answers directly, or even using hand gestures during multiple-choice tests. Despite knowing that cheating is unethical, many students view it as a necessary strategy to survive the pressure of assessments (Lacanlale, Manalaysay, & Francisco, 2022). For some, this behavior becomes normalized, as noted by Student E, who said, “It seems that everybody is doing it ” indicating that cheating is seen as common among students.

Students exhibit numerous behaviors during Assessment

During observation, there are numerous types of behaviors that students exemplified during assessment period like asking directly the classmates for the answer, peeking at their classmates’ answer, directly teaching their classmate the correct answer, roaming around or disarranging their seats to collect answers and even opening their notebooks without teachers’ permission. The table below shows the frequency of the behaviors shown during assessment period. The following behaviors are based on Jordan (2001), McCabe et al (2001), Northumbria University (2013) as cited by Diego, L. A. B. (2017) and on Daumiller, M., & Janke, S. (2019).

Table 1.  Behavior of STE students during Assessment Period

No.	Behavior	STE
		Formative		Summative		Quarterly Exam
		Presence	Absence	Presence	Absence	Presence	Absence
1	Students are exchanging notes with one another	0	0	0	0	0	0
2	Asking directly other students of the correct answer	6 times (6 students involved)	41 times (8 students involved)	4 times (2 students involved)	3 times (2 students involved)	4 times (3 students involved	13 times (4 students involved)
3	Students are using browser/internet to search for the answer	0	0	0	0	0	0
4	Peeking at other student’s answer	11 times (5 students involved)	23 times (7 students involved)	0	26 times (4 students involved)	2 times (1 student involved	14 times (3 students involved)
5	Copying from another test paper	0	0	0	0	0	0
6	Using gestures to get the answer from the classmate	0	0	0	0	Once (1 student involved)	0
7	Taking unauthorized material into examination.	0	0	0	0	0	0
	OTHERS:		– STE 16 and 19 are roaming around to ask for the correct answer- STE 7 and 9 transferred seats- STE 28 and 14 are teaching their classmates the correct answer

Table 2.  Behavior of Regular students during Assessment Period

No.	Behavior	REGULAR
		Formative		Summative		Quarterly Exam
		Presence	Absence	Presence	Absence	Presence	Absence
1	Students are exchanging notes with one another	0	0	0	0	0	0
2	Asking directly other students of the correct answer	7 times (3 students involved	14 times (4 students involved)	0	10 times (2 students involved)	2 times (1 student involved)	3 times (3 students involved)
3	Students are using browser/internet to search for the answer	0	0	0	Once (1 student involved)	0	0
4	Peeking at other student’s answer	15 times (6 students involved)	34 times (5 students involved)	22 times (5 students involved)	33 times (4 students involved)	11 times (4 students involved)	35 times (7 students involved)
5	Copying from another test paper	0	0	0	0	0	0
6	Using gestures to get the answer from the classmate	0	0	0	0	0	0
7	Taking unauthorized material into examination.	0	0	0	0	0	0
	OTHERS:	-REG 23 is denying that he is peeking from his classmates’ answer but rather he is only finding his ball pen on the ground	– REG 31, REG 3 and REG 24 Transferred seats to work in groups.- REG 28 is roaming around to copy from classmates	-REG 24 is looking for answers in her notebook	-REG 35, REG 23 and REG 45 is roaming around to collect answers

Based on the table above, the most frequent behavior during assessment when there is a teacher is peeking at their classmates’ test paper. This has been demonstrated 61 times, involving a total of 21 students from both sections. This behavior is most likely seen with Regular students at 48 times compared with STE which exhibited 13 times. This behavior is the most convenient way to get answers from their classmates because their classmate may or may not be aware that they are peeking at their papers.  Additionally, there were 23 times involving 15 students are asking directly the correct answers from their classmates and one student who used gestures to get answers from his classmates.

On the other hand, if the teacher is not around, the highest frequency shown on the table above is peeking at others’ answer which has 134 times which involves 30 student and thus, this is common way to Regular students.  It has been observed that the second common way to get answers from others is to directly ask for it. It has been illustrated 84 times involving 23 students. Additionally, there is 1 regular student who used internet or browsing his cellphone while answering the test.

Moreover, there were additional behaviors shown by the students that were not identified on the observation sheet. In the STE, students are teaching the process or the answer to his classmate. As I observed, this method is done unintentionally or unaware that this behavior is a form of cheating. In regular section, some students are pretending to go to CR or to pick something from others or in the ground to peek their classmates’ answers denying their act of cheating. One student was caught opening his notes and looking for the answer without teachers’ permission to do so.

Difference of Students’ Behavior During Assessment Between Classes in the Presence or Absence of The Teacher

The frequency of students’ behavior varies depending on whether the teacher is present or absent during assessment period. The table below shows the frequency of students’ behaviors in the presence and absence of the teacher.

Table 3.  Behavior of STE students during Assessment Period in the Presence or Absence of the Teacher

No.	Behavior	STE
		With Teachers’ Presence			With Teacher’s Absence
		Formative	Summative	Quarterly Exam	Formative	Summative	Quarterly Exam
1	Students are exchanging notes with one another	0	0	0	0	0	0
2	Asking directly other students of the correct answer	6 times (6 students involved)	4 times (2 students involved)	4 times (3 students involved	41 times (8 students involved)	3 times (2 students involved)	13 times (4 students involved)
3	Students are using browser/internet to search for the answer	0	0	0	0	0
4	Peeking at other student’s answer	11 times (5 students involved)	0	2 times (1 student involved	23 times (7 students involved)	26 times (4 students involved)	14 times (3 students involved)
5	Copying from another test paper	0	0		0	0	0
6	Using gestures to get the answer from the classmate	0	0	Once (1 student involved)	0	0	0
7	Taking unauthorized material into examination.	0	0	0	0	0	0
	OTHERS:				– STE 16 and 19 are roaming around to ask for the correct answer- STE 7 and 9 transferred seats- STE 28 and 14 are teaching their classmates the correct answer

Table 4.  Behavior of Regular students during Assessment Period in the Presence or Absence of the Teacher

No.	Behavior	REGULAR
		With Teachers’ Presence			With Teacher’s Absence
		Formative	Summative	Quarterly Exam	Formative	Summative	Quarterly Exam
1	Students are exchanging notes with one another	0	0		0	0	0
2	Asking directly other students of the correct answer	7 times (3 students involved	0	2 times (1 student involved)	14 times (4 students involved)	10 times (2 students involved)	3 times (3 students involved)
3	Students are using browser/internet to search for the answer	0	0		0	Once (1 student involved)	0
4	Peeking at other student’s answer	15 times (6 students involved)	22 times (5 students involved)	11 times (4 students involved)	34 times (5 students involved)	33 times (4 students involved)	35 times (7 students involved)
5	Copying from another test paper	0	0	0	0	0	0
6	Using gestures to get the answer from the classmate	0	0	0	0	0	0
7	Taking unauthorized material into examination.	0	0	0	0	0
	OTHERS:	-REG 23 is denying that he is peeking from his classmates’ answer but rather he is only finding his ball pen on the ground	-REG 24 is looking for answers in her notebook		– REG 31, REG 3 and REG 24 Transferred seats to work in groups. – REG 28 is roaming around to copy from classmates	-REG 35, REG 23 and REG 45 is roaming around to collect answers

Based on the table, it’s clear that the behaviors exhibited by students in the absence of the teacher are almost tripled compared to those observed behavior when the teacher is present when the three assessments was conducted. This would imply that in the absence of the teacher, students will grab the chance to exhibit academic dishonesty more often. This supports the findings of Dyer et al (2020) where he claimed that students were more likely to engage in cheating behavior on an unproctored test than when that test is proctored. The lack of supervision creates an environment where students feel more confident in engaging in dishonest behavior because the absence of a teacher removes an immediate authority figure, reducing the risk of being caught.

Other behaviors observed in the absence of the teacher is that, students are free to move around and transfer seats to look for the answers. That behavior is observable in both STE and regular sections.  When the teacher is present during assessment period, STE students are more behave compared to regular sections. They are more focused on the assessment while regular students are still making a way to get some answers from their classmates. Opening of notes without teacher’s permission during assessment was also caught on regular student only using hand gestures during examination was seen on STE student only.

Difference of Scores Obtained During Assessment Period of two Classes

The table shows the test result analyzing the significant difference in the scores of STE students with the presence or absence of the teacher during assessment period.

Table 5.  T-test result of Scores obtained by STE students during Assessment Period

Tests	Mean		T -dependent value	P value	Remarks
	With Teacher	Without Teacher
Formative	31.31	31.90	3.64	0.0005	Significant
Summative	72.90	87.55	7.73	<0.0001	Significant
Exam	18.45	20	1.84	0.04	Significant

*p< .05 is significant

The table above demonstrates that the mean scores of STE students across all types of assessments are significantly higher when these assessments are conducted without the presence of a teacher. Specifically, in the Quarterly Examination, students’ scores increased by 8.4% compared to when the test has the presence of the teacher. The summative test showed an even more obvious increase of 20.1%, while the formative assessment had a smaller but notable rise of 2%. This trend suggests that the absence of strict supervision during assessments may lead to a higher occurrence of academic dishonesty, resulting in inflated scores that do not accurately reflect students’ true knowledge and skills.

Table 4. T-test result of Scores obtained by Regular students during Assessment Period

Tests	Mean		T value	P value	Remark
	With Teacher	Without Teacher
Formative	19.35	26.38	5.85	<0.0001	Significant
Summative	46.26	59.12	5.51	<0.0001	Significant
Exam	10.05	10.50	0.82	0.21	Not Significant

*p< .05 is significant

The table above presents the mean scores of regular students across various types of assessments, revealing significant differences depending on the presence or absence of a teacher during the testing process. Notably, in the Quarterly Examination, students’ scores rose by 4.48% when administered without a teacher’s supervision, reflecting a slight but observable improvement. The summative test showed a more pronounced increase of 27.80%, while the most remarkable change occurred in the formative assessment, where scores surged by 36.33%.

Over- all, it can be inferred that there is a significant difference on their scores regardless of the curriculum they in. The presence of a teacher in the classroom is highly significant especially during assessment period because it has a great impact on the students’ scores.

This finding is in line with the study conducted by Lacanlale, Manalaysay, & Francisco (2022), their findings indicate a statistically significant relationship between students’ academic performance and academic cheating. Although this correlation result is considered weak, it still suggests that academic cheating plays a role in influencing students’ academic outcomes. This suggests that students involved in academic dishonesty may see an increase in their academic performance scores.

CONCLUSION

Students view assessments as challenging because they demand strong analytical and problem-solving skills. The scores they achieve have a significant impact on their grades, leading to increased pressure to excel. Moreover, assessments carry an emotional weight for students, as they take their results seriously and often fear the prospect of failure. Additionally, parental expectations play a vital role in shaping students’ perceptions of assessments, further amplifying the stress and pressure they face.

Students respond differently to assessments, influenced by their confidence levels and coping strategies. Some students experience cognitive barriers such as nervousness and fear, while others remain calm and approach assessments with a relaxed attitude. Confidence tends to increase when familiar topics are included on tests, underscoring the importance of effective study habits. However, for those who struggle, academic dishonesty may become a coping strategy.

There are various forms of academic dishonesty and misconduct are observed during assessments, with peeking at classmates’ test papers being the most common among both STE and Regular students, regardless of teacher supervision. Directly asking classmates for answers is another frequently observed behavior, while fewer students resort to opening notebooks without permission or using hand gestures to communicate. Additionally, actions such as roaming around or changing seats further highlight the need for stricter monitoring and reinforcement of academic integrity during both formative and summative assessments.

The presence of a teacher plays a crucial role in regulating student behavior during assessments. The findings indicate a consistent increase in academic misconduct and other behaviors when assessments are conducted without teacher supervision, regardless of the type of test – formative, summative, or quarterly examinations.

The absence of a teacher during assessments appears to influence students’ performance, as shown by the significant increase in scores during formative and summative assessments for both STE and Regular sections. However, during quarterly assessments, only the STE students showed a notable increase in scores, while the Regular section did not exhibit a significant difference.

The recommendations focus on creating an educational environment that values integrity by teaching honesty and fairness within the curriculum, enforcing strict policies against cheating, and designing assessments that make it harder to cheat, like rearranging seating or using different versions of tests. It also suggests encouraging students to reflect on their behaviors during exams to boost self-awareness. Additionally, parents are encouraged to better understand their children’s academic and emotional challenges to provide the right support, while researchers are urged to look deeper into how teachers handle cheating and motivate students during assessments to improve the overall testing experience.

To make future research more meaningful and widely applicable, it would be valuable to include a broader range of schools from different continents. This diversity can help ensure that the findings reflect a variety of educational settings and cultural contexts. Additionally, studying student behavior over a longer period could offer richer insights into how their attitudes and actions change over time, revealing patterns that short-term studies might miss.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declared no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

1. Alam Said, M., Idris, M., & Hussain, S. (2018). Relationship between Social Behaviour and Academic Performance of Students at Secondary Level in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Pakistan Journal of Distance & Online Learning, I, 153–170.
2. Alia, L. C., & Dolotallas, A. C. (2018). Perception towards Examination and Students ’ Performance in Three Modes of Quizzes. 5(2), 60–72. https://doi.org/10.30845/jesp.v5n2p8
3. ALSOLA-DULAY, L. (2020). Classroom Behavior and Academic Performance of Public Elementary School Pupils. International Journal of Research Publications, 56(1). https://doi.org/10.47119/ijrp100561720201297
4. Bautista, R. A., Morada, M. H. D., & Pineda, A. L. J. (2021). A Comparative Study of the Academic Performance of STEM and Non-STEM Graduates in College and Advanced Algebra. 6(2).
5. Bene, K., Lapina, A., Birida, A., Ekore, J. O., & Adan, S. (2021). A Comparative Study of Self-Regulation Levels and Academic Performance among STEM and Non-STEM University Students Using Multivariate Analysis of Variance. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(3), 320–337. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.76
6. Berman, E. A. (2017). An Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Approach to Understanding Researchers ’ Data Management Practices at UVM : Integrated Findings to Develop Research Data Services Full-Length Paper. 6(1). https://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2017.1104
7. Box, C. (2018). Formative Assessment in United States Classrooms: Changing the Landscape of Teaching and Learning. Formative Assessment in United States Classrooms: Changing the Landscape of Teaching and Learning, 1–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03092-6
8. Bronstein, B., Breeden, N., Glover, T. A., & Reddy, L. A. (2020). Paraprofessionals ’ Perceptions of Behavior Problems in Elementary School Classrooms. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466920961085
9. Buckner, C. A., Lafrenie, R. M., Dénommée, J. A., Caswell, J. M., & Want, D. A. (2018). Complementary and alternative medicine use in patients before and after a cancer diagnosis. In Current Oncology (Vol. 25, Issue 4). https://doi.org/10.3747/co.25.3884
10. Carless, D. (2017). Students’ Experiences of Assessment for Learning. Enabling Power of A (Yazlik, 2017)ssessment, 5, 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3045-1_8
11. Chen, S. (2021). Teachers ’ Perceptions of Teacher – Child Relationships , Student Behavior , and Classroom Management. 11(1), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2020.11.1.11
12. Cheng, L., Wu, Y., & Liu, X. (2015). Chinese university students’ perceptions of assessment tasks and classroom assessment environment. Language Testing in Asia, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-015-0020-6
13. Cvencek, D., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2021). Development of Math Attitudes and Math Self-Concepts : Gender Differences , Implicit – Explicit Dissociations , and Relations to Math Achievement. 92(5). https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13523
14. Dagogo, B. H. (2020). The student behavior and its relationship on academic achievement : A Study of Nigeria High Schools. 8(4), 93–107.
15. Daumiller, M., & Janke, S. (2019). The Impact of Performance Goals on Cheating Depends on How Performance Is Evaluated. AERA Open, 5(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419894276
16. DeVries, J. M., Rathmann, K., & Gebhardt, M. (2018). How does social behavior relate to both grades and achievement scores? Frontiers in Psychology, 9(JUN), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00857
17. Diego, L. A. B. (2017). Friends with Benefits: Causes and Effects of Learners’ Cheating Practices During Examination. IAFOR Journal of Education, 5(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.5.2.06
18. Eboatu, V.N. (2017). Comparative Study of the Impact of Class Repetition and Mass Promotion on Students’ Academic Achievement in Anambra State. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 13(28), 394. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2017.v13n28p394
19. Ekua, A. T., & Sekyi. (2016). Assessment, Student Learning and Classroom Practice: A Review. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(21), 1–6. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1109385&site=ehost-live
20. Esmaeili, Z., Mohamadrezai, H., & Mohamadrezai, A. (2015). The role of teacher ’ s authority in students ’ learning. 6(19), 1–16.
21. Fendler, R. J., Yates, M. C., & Godbey, J. M. (2018). Observing and Deterring Social Cheating on College Exams. 12(1), 1–9.
22. Gaytos, C. E. G. (2019). Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3507229. November.
23. Gezer, T., Wang, C., Polly, A., Martin, C., Pugalee, D., & Lambert, R. (2021). The Relationship between Formative Assessment and Summative Assessment in Primary Grade Mathematics Classrooms *. 13(5), 673–685.
24. Guinocor, M., Almerino, P., Mamites, I., Lumayag, C., Villaganas, M. A., & Capuyan, M. (2020). Mathematics Performance of Students in a Philippine State University. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/7859
25. Kamugisha, J. J. (2021). An Assessment of Perception of Students toward English as an International Language ( A Case of Mwakaleli , Luteba , Mwatisi , Isange and Mbigili Secondary Schools in Busokelo District Council – Mbeya Region , Tanzania ). 4th International Conference on Teaching, Learning Adn Education, 200–222.
26. Khodabakhshzadehs, H., & Shoahosseini, R. (2021). The Relationships among Attitudes towards Cheating , Academic Self- Confidence , and General Language Ability among Iranian EFL Learners. 11(2), 1–12.
27. Kirkpatrick, A. J., & Waring Tiedeman, S. (2019). The Impact Student Behavior has on Learning The Impact Student Behavior has on Learning The Impact Student Behavior has on Learning. https://nwcommons.nwciowa.edu/education_masters
28. Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a Thematic Analysis : A Practical , Step-by-Step Guide for Learning and Teaching Scholars . 3(3).
29. Maulida, J. D., & Kariyam. (2017). Students academic performance based on behavior. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1911. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5016003
30. Mazana, M. Y., Montero, C. S., & Casmir, R. O. (2020). Assessing Students ’ Performance in Mathematics in Tanzania : The Teacher ’ s Perspective. 15(3).
31. Methkal, Y., Algani, A., Fareed, Y., & Alhaija, A. (2020). Cheating in mathematics exams and its relation to the student ’ s gender. 19(2), 1186–1202. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2020.02.696707
32. Nortvedt, G. A., & Buchholtz, N. (2018). Assessment in mathematics education : responding to issues regarding methodology , policy , and equity. ZDM, 50(4), 555–570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0963-z
33. Nurdin, E., Mz, Z. A., Nufus, H., Thakur, D., Shah, F. A., & Dube, R. (2021). Let your students cheat on mathematics online exams : studen ts ’ perspectives. 4(2), 131–136.
34. Okurut, J. M. (2015). Examining the Effect of Automatic Promotion on Students’ Learning Achievements in Uganda’s Primary Education. World Journal of Education, 5(5), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v5n5p85
35. Qudah, A. H., & Jordan, M. (2016). Assessment Skills : A Case of Mathematics Examination and Its Place in Math-Teacher Development. 7(6), 194–205.
36. Senel, E., Yildiz, M., & Can, S. (2020). The Role of Moral Attitude , Goal Commitment , and Cheating Tendency in Academic Achievement The Role of Moral Attitude , Goal Commitment , and Cheating Tendency in Academic Achievement. 15(1). https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.236.4
37. Shen, X. (2021). Research Article A College Student Behavior Analysis and Management Method Based on Machine Learning Technology. 2021.
38. Suurtamm, C., Florida, S., Kim, R. Y., & Moreno, L. D. (2016). Assessment in Mathematics Education : Large- Scale Assessment and Classroom Assessment.
39. Syaifuddin, M. (2020). European Journal of Educational Research. 9(4), 1491–1502. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.4.1491
40. Ukobizaba, F., Nizeyimana, G., & Mukuka, A. (2021). Assessment Strategies for Enhancing Students ’ Mathematical Problem-solving Skills : A Review of Literature. 17(3).
41. Vaessen, B. E., Beemt, A. Van Den, Watering, G. Van De, Ludo, W., Meeuwen, V., Lemmens, L., & Brok, P. Den. (2017). Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Students ’ perception of frequent assessments and its relation to motivation and grades in a statistics course : a pilot study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2938, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1204532
42. Valdez, M. T. C. C., & Maderal, L. D. (2021). An Analysis of Students ’ Perception of Online Assessments and its Relation to Motivation Towards Mathematics Learning. 19(5), 416–431.
43. Villanueva, M. A. L. O., Ed, M. A., David, B., Ph, D., & Hum, D. (2020). BEHAVIORAL PROBLEMS OF STUDENTS OBSERVED BY THE SECONDARY SCHEME. 145–150.
44. Vu, D., Pekovi, S., Ble, M., & Rajka, Đ. (2020). Attitudes towards cheating behavior during assessing students performance : student and teacher perspectives. 3, 1–28.
45. Xiao, F., & Sun, L. (2021). Students’ Motivation and Affection Profiles and Their Relation to Mathematics Achievement, Persistence, and Behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(January), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.533593
46. Yazlik, D. O. (2017). Teacher and Student Views About the Unwanted Student Behaviors in the Mathematics Cources. 8(25), 96–108.