Pierre Boulos PhDCAREB 2015

Pre-Conference WorkshopPre-Conference Workshop

1

Conducting research using our own children, ahem, I mean our own students, as participants

Acknowledgement

• Dr. Suzanne McMurphy, Vice-Chair, UWindsor REB

Why engage in research ethics?

3

Definitions Ethics

– Codes or principles of conduct– Principles upon which actions or decisions are based,

value system

Human Participant/Subject– Living individual about whom an investigator

(professional or student) conducting research obtains:• Data through intervention or interaction with the

individual • Private information

What are the benefits ?

• Better research - planned and designed

• Clarify thinking early

• Peer review and feedback of methods

• Protected vulnerable populations

• Able to disseminate data publicly

• Overall improved quality through the questions of the Ethics Board

5

What are ethical concerns in SoTL?

• Dual role: teacher/researcher

• Coercion

• Vulnerable population

• Stigma: Masking non-participation

• Withholding an intervention reasonably believed to be helpful

• Data collection already started before research idea

6

A Quick word about Core Principles

Core principles adapted from Belmont1. Respect for Persons

– Informed consent, Voluntariness, Avoid coercion

2. Beneficence/Welfare– Risk/Benefits

3. Justice– Recruitment –burden and benefits of research shared

equally

4th Suggested:

4. Respect for Community

7

CASE EXAMPLE

Case study example

• Courses across a variety of departments designed to develop skills in clinical assessment using an experiential learning model, e.g. social work, nursing, psychology, kinesiology, etc.

• Controversy in disciplines whether ‘real-time’ interaction and live actors improves students’ assessment skills and scores on licensure tests—or reduces their attention to detail

• Purpose of study—explore the difference in assessment skills between students who practiced with live actors versus those using models.

Research Questions

• How does the use of different models (live actors, peers, simulated models) influence student learning experiences?

• What influence on student assessment skills will each of the different types of models have?

• What influence will the different types of learning have on retention and subsequent clinical examinations?

Hypotheses

• Students who practice with live models will have:– Improved clinical assessment skills– Increased retention of course content – More positive experience of the course– Higher scores on practice professional

assessment tests

When compared to students who practice with simulated models

Research design

• Due to the controversy on positive outcomes using live models versus simulations—experimental design—randomized control trial (RCT) most appropriate

• RCT within a specific class most advantageous from research design perspective to reduce bias

Research Design: Implementation

• RCT requires:– Baseline skills assessments (T1) – Random assignment into intervention (live

actors) and control (simulated models—TAU)– final assessment (T2)

• How to avoid ‘contamination’ of treatment group within a classroom setting?

Curriculum/Course Design Issue

• How to randomly assign students into the two different learning techniques—live actors versus simulated models?

• What happens if we find out that the live actors model is substantially better?

STOP, Stay Calm, Think

• Think of one ethical issue that may arise out of the research design

• Share it with a neighbour

15

Ethics Issues: Recruitment

• RCT design introduces potential social justice ethics issue—disadvantaging one group over another (risk/benefit)

• Need to differentiate between course content and evaluation of the course content-voluntariness and withdrawal

Ethics Issue: Social justice

• If we hypothesize that the tx will be better than the control, how will we compensate the control group within one semester?

Research Design: Case-crossover study

• Modify the design into a case cross-over study• Baseline—random assignment—cross over

Mid-term

Baseline Tx1 TX1Outcome

TX2 TX2

Curriculum issues

• How to fit the research into the existing curriculum—will the research ‘take over’ the course content?

• How to gather information on student experience from those that are not participating in the evaluation?

Constructive Alignment

20

Research Issues: Data Gathering

• Baseline skills assessment

• Mid-term feedback

• Final outcome assessment

• Introduce a qualitative methodology—interviews with students at mid-term and final assessment

Ethics Issues: Confidentiality and Consent

• How to use student feedback data designed for curriculum use, not research use

Research Design

• Final analysis with baseline and final course grade and assessment combined with qualitative feedback

Ethics Issues: Confidentiality and Feedback to participants

When?

How?

Additional Research design and ethics issues

• Using student feedback and evaluation information as research data post-hoc

• Building consent into course syllabi

• Testing different curriculum content and learning techniques without RCT designs

Ethical Concerns in SoTL

What are some of the ethical concerns that might occur in your SoTL projects?

– Think individually– Share ideas in pairs

(~5 min)

26

Resources

Burman, M.E., & Kleinsasser, A.M. (2004). Ethical guidelines for use of student work: Moving from teaching’s invisibility to inquiry’s visibility in the scholarship of teaching and learning. The Journal of General Education, 53(1), 59-79.

Hutchings, P. (2003). Competing goods: Ethical issues in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Change (Sept./Oct.), 27-33.

MacLean, M., & Poole, G. (2010). An introduction to the ethical consideration for novices to research in teaching and learning in Canada. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1 (2) article 7. Retrieved from http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cjsotl_rcacea/vol1/iss2/7.

McKinney, K., & Cross, K.P. (2007).Enhancing Learning Through the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: The Challenges and Joys of Juggling. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco. (particularly Chapter 5)

27

Resources• National Council on Ethics in Human Research, http://www.ncehr-cnerh.org/• Canadian Institutes of Health Research, http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/• Social Sciences and humanities Research Council of Canada,

http://www.sshrc.ca/• Government of Canada, Panel on Research Ethics,

http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/http://pre.ethics.gc.ca/english/tutorial/

• Local School Boards/Hospitalswww.uwindsor.ca/reb

• Panel on Research Ethics (http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/english/policystatement/policystatement.cfm )

• EthicsWeb.ca (http://www.ethicsweb.ca/resources/research/index.html) • ResearchEthics.ca (http://www.researchethics.ca/)• The Research Ethics Blog (http://www.researchethics.ca/blog/)• US Office of Human Subjects Protection (OHRP)

http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp• Citizens for Responsible Care and Research

http://www.circare.org/CAindex.htm

Resources• US Office of Human Subjects Protection (OHRP)

http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp

• Canada National Council on Ethics in Human Research

• http://www.ncehr-cnerh.org/• Panel on Research Ethics• www.pre.ethics.gc.ca• http://pre.ethics.gc.ca/english/tutorial/• Citizens for Responsible Care and Research• http://www.circare.org/CAindex.htm