2017 | 5(2017) | 41–55
Article title

Corruption in schools? The scale and sources of corruption perceptions in Poland

Title variants
Languages of publication
This paper analyses the scale and sources of views on the prevalence of corruption in the education sector in Poland. Through the use of public opinion surveys, I answer questions on how the corruption level in Polish educational institutions has changed over time and how it compares to other public institutions (such as the health care sector and police) and to the situation in other European countries. My goal is to investigate the effect of individual-level predictors of perceiving schools as corrupt in Poland, with special attention given to structural determinants and previous bribe-giving experiences of respondents. The results reveal that in Poland relatively few respondents have experienced recent acts of giving bribes in schools or perceive educational institutions as corrupt. However, there is a structural pattern behind the sources of negative opinions. The effect of socio-economic determinants on views relating to corruption in Polish schools is strongly pronounced and trends in the opposite direction compared to the effects reported in other European countries.
Physical description
  • Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences
  • Abbink, K. and Wu, K. (2013). Reward self-reporting to deter corruption: an experiment on mitigating collusive bribery. Wellington: Monash University, Department of Economics. Retrieved from
  • Azfar, O. (2005). Corruption and the delivery of health and education services. In B. I. Spector (ed.), Fighting corruption in developing countries: strategies and analysis (pp. 181–212) Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.
  • Baniak, J. (2012). Łapownictwo w moralnej ocenie religijnych i niereligijnych studentów stacjonarnych i niestacjonarnych. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Sociologica, 40, 167–190.
  • Bardhan, P. (1997). Corruption and development: a review of the issues. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 1320–1346.
  • Bardhan, P. (2006). The economist’s approach to the problem of corruption. World Development, 34(2), 341–348.
  • Borcan, O., Lindahl, M., Mitrut, A. (2017). Fighting corruption in education: what works and who benefits? American Economic Journal. Economic Policy, 9(1), 180–209.
  • Brown, A. J. (2006). What are we trying to measure? Reviewing the basics of corruption definition. In Ch. Sampford, A. Shacklock, C. Connors and F. Galtung (eds.), Measuring corruption (pp. 57–79). Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej (2013a). Opinie o korupcji w Polsce. Research note No. BS/105/2013. Warszawa: Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej.
  • Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej (2013b). Stosunek do łapownictwa i doświadczenia z nim związane. Research note No. BS/109/2013. Warszawa: Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej.
  • Chapman, D. (2002). Corruption and the education sector. Retrieved from
  • Charron, N. (2016). Do corruption measures have a perception problem? Assessing the relationship between experiences and perceptions of corruption among citizens and experts. European Political Science Review, 8(1), 147–171.
  • Eurydice (2015). The system of education in Poland in brief. Retrieved from
  • Global Corruption Barometer. [Database]. Retrieved from
  • Granovetter, M. (2007). The social construction of corruption. In V. Nee and R. Swedberg (eds.), On capitalism (pp. 152–172). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Haller, D. and Shore, C. (2005). Corruption: anthropological perspectives. London–Ann Arbor: Pluto.
  • Heath, A. F., Richards, L. and Graaf, N. D. de (2016). Explaining corruption in the developed world: the potential of sociological approaches. Annual Review of Sociology, 42, 51–79.
  • Heidenheimer, A. J. and Johnston, M. (2002). Political corruption: concepts & contexts (3rd ed.). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
  • Hunt, J. (2007). How corruption hits people when they are down. Journal of Development Economics, 84(2), 574–89.
  • Jain, A. K. (2008). Corruption. In W. A. Darity (ed.), International encyclopedia of the social sciences (2nd ed.). Detroit: Macmillan Reference.
  • Johnston, M. (1996). The search for definitions: the vitality of politics and the issue of corruption. International Social Science Journal, 48(149), 321–336.
  • Karklins, R. (2005). The system made me do it: corruption in post-communist societies. Armonk: Sharpe.
  • Kaufmann. D. (2005). Myths and realities about governance and corruption. In Global competitiveness report 2005–2006 (pp. 81–98). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Kurer, O. (2005). Corruption: an alternative approach to definition and measurement. Political Studies, 53(1), 222–239.
  • Kurer, O. (2015). Definitions of corruption. In P. M. Heywood (ed.), The Routledge handbook of political corruption (pp. 30–41). New York: Routledge.
  • Łaciak, B. (2000). Korupcja w szkolnictwie – formy i zakres zjawiska. In J. Kurczewski and B. Łaciak Korupcja w życiu społecznym (pp. 63–79). Warszawa: Instytut Spraw Publicznych.
  • Lortie, D. C. (2000) Schoolteacher: a sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • McManus-Czubińska, C., Miller, W., Markowski, R. and Wasilewski, J. (2004). Why is corruption in Poland “a serious cause for concern”? Crime, Law and Social Change, 41(2), 107–132.
  • Melgar, N., Rossi, M. and Smith, T. W. (2010). The perception of corruption. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(1), 120–131.
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2017). OECD reviews of integrity in education: Ukraine 2017. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  • Osipian, A. (2009). Corruption and reform in higher education in Ukraine. Canadian and International Education, 38(2), 104.
  • Porta, D. della (2000). Social capital, beliefs in government, and political corruption. In S. J. Pharr and R. D. Putnam (eds.), Disaffected democracies: what’s troubling the trilateral countries? (pp. 202–228). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Porta, D. della and Vannucci, A. (2012). The hidden order of corruption: an institutional approach. Burlington: Ashgate.
  • Quality of Government Survey (2010). Retrieved from
  • Rose, R. and Peiffer, C. (2015). Paying bribes for public services: a global guide to grass-roots corruption. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999). Corruption and government: causes, consequences, and reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Rothstein, B. (2011). The quality of government: corruption, social trust, and inequality in international perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Rumyantseva, N. L. (2005). Taxonomy of corruption in higher education. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(1), 81–92.
  • Sabic-El-Rayess, A. and Mansur, N. N. (2016). Favor reciprocation theory in education: new corruption typology. International Journal of Educational Development, 50, 20–32.
  • Shahe Emran, M., Islam, A. and Shilpi, F. (2013). Admission is free only if your dad is rich! Distributional effects of corruption in schools in developing countries. Policy Research Working Paper No. 6671. Washington: World Bank. Retrieved from
  • Slomczynski, K. and Shabad, G. (2012). Perceptions of political party corruption and voting behavior in Poland. Party Politics, 18(6), 897–917.
  • Tanzi, V. (1998). Corruption around the world: causes, consequences, scope, and cures. International Monetary Fund Working Paper No. WP/98/63. Retrieved from
  • Transparency International (2013). Global corruption report: education. London–New York: Transparency International–Routledge.
  • Warren, M. E. (2004). What does corruption mean in a democracy? American Journal of Political Science, 48(2), 328–343.
  • Williams, R. (1999). New concepts for old? Third World Quarterly, 20(3), 503–513.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.