“ THANK YOU LISIATE IKAAFU...What kind of supporting evidence are you looking for, or are you just making an argument for the sake of being argumentative? Or muddied the water so you can score a point? Strong supporting evidence? What is your theoretical premise that disqualifies a comparison between Tongan vs. Fijian students?
Are you looking for a "positivism" or "phenomenological" evidence? Take your pick because there are only 2 choices, but I'm willing to wager Fiji Education study (2016) is a quantitative (positivist study) because they used statistics (number of students; number of passes vs. number of failures).
Like I stated: Numbers don't lie. And Tongan students aren't so righteous as the wind-driven snow not to take advantage of a flawed and weak (inferior) Raw Marks system, which is supposed to guard against plagiarism.
Tonga's 27% success rate shows more students weren't vetted, or tutored hard enough to pass. The same results if you wished to use a "correlational" relationship test (another positivism method) to prove Tongan students were not as guilty as the case in Fiji, but I doubt it very much.
You have neither strong supporting evidence that cheating (plagiarism) did not contribute to Tonga's high failure rate. There's a simple descriptive evidence by observation: plagiarism increased and failure rates rose. ”