Article 2: Action Research in Education – Addressing Gaps in Ethical Principles and Practices

September 20-26: The lead blogger is Tim, who will post his blog by Sunday midnight. Follow-up blogs are due Wednesday midnight.

5 Responses to "Article 2: Action Research in Education – Addressing Gaps in Ethical Principles and Practices"

Timothy Corallo says:

September 23, 2018 at 8:02 pm

In the 2007 article, “Action Research in Education: Addressing the Gaps in Ethical Principles and Practices,” Nolen & Putten discuss ethical issues specific to conducting action research in K-12 school settings. The authors first define action research as systematic research conducted by practitioners in educational settings. Nolan & Putten (2007) then note that the ethical considerations set forth in the Belmont Report (1979) are the primary standard for all types of research involving human participants, including action research. However, these authors contend that the dual role of teacher researchers (as an educator and a scientist/researcher) as well as the relationship between the teacher-researcher and the student participants create unique ethical challenges to the research process. Nolen & Putten then explain that while the Belmont Report (1979) sets forth appropriate ethical standards for research with human participants, the conversation regarding ethical considerations specific to action research is somewhat lacking. The purpose of this article, then, was to discuss specific areas of concern and offer recommendations regarding ethics in action research.

Nolan & Putten (2007) discuss several issues in ethical considerations for conducting educational action research: obtaining informed consent, respecting the autonomy of participants, protecting the confidentiality of participants, and ethical standards related to the disciplines of research and education. Regarding informed consent, the authors specifically discuss difficulty related to whether students are capable of understanding the nature of the study, whether the students feel coerced to give consent, and the need for parental consent (in addition to student consent/assent). Similarly, when discussing the autonomy of participants, Nolan & Putten (2007) note that there may be issues regarding students voluntarily participating when the researcher is also the teacher for those students. The students may feel that participation in a study is required, even if the teacher-researcher specifically states that participation is not mandatory. Regarding protecting the confidentiality of participants, Nolan & Putten (2007) state that an inexperience of teacher researchers in data collection, storing data, and transmitting data may lead to potential data breaches. Finally, the authors discuss ethical issues which may arise given the dual roles of teacher researchers as practitioners and scientists. Specifically, Nolan & Putten (2007) state that teachers must uphold their responsibility to protect their students’ interests in situations where this may conflict with the research being conducted.

Beyond discussing ethical issues specific to action research in education, Nolan & Putten (2007) offer several recommendations to help improve the practice of educational action research. These authors suggest that members Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) become better educated regarding the methods of action research. Further, the authors suggest that experienced teacher-researchers be invited to sit as part of IRBs in order to better evaluate the ethics of conducting action research. Nolan & Putten (2007) also suggest that teacher researchers seek to better understand how their dual roles of practitioner and scientist can affect student perceptions of the option to participate in a study or not. The authors suggest writing assent/consent documents which clearly state that participation is optional and that there is no punishment for not participating. Further, the authors suggest that all teacher researchers complete a course in research ethics. Aside from the suggestions specifically for IRBs and action researchers, Nolan & Putten (2007) also suggest that national organizations for education create a document which specifically addresses ethical issues in educational action research.

While reading this article, I began to consider what informed consent may look like for students who may not understand the purpose of a study, or even the basic procedures that will take place. How can a student consent/assent to participate in a study if they do not understand what will happen during the course of the study? In my study for Research 2, my proposed participants are students diagnosed with autism. The three students from my classroom are aged 14, 18, and 19. All three are emerging speakers/listeners. One of the students is reading/comprehending at approximately a first or second grade level, and the other two are reading/comprehending at an early kindergarten level. I am concerned that they will not be able to understand the procedure that will take place in my study, nor that they are being asked to participate in a study at all.

In order to gain an appropriate level of consent, I will be seeking consent from the parents/guardians of each student. Fortunately, for the study, the parents of both adult aged students have retained full guardianship rights which means that the parents can make legally binding decisions for those students. However, I still feel that I have an ethical responsibility to ensure the students themselves in some way show consent to participate. Unfortunately, Nolan & Putten (2007) did not offer specific recommendations for my dilemma. However, I think that receiving consent from each partent/guardian, verbally explaining the study as simply as possible to these students, and by asking a simple yes/no question before each session involved in the study (e.g. “Do you want to do yoga right now?”) will hopefully suffice for assent. As recommended by Nolan & Putten (2007), I will have to use my best judgement in my role as an educator to provide for my students’ best interests. This will mean not only asking whether each student wants to participate before each session, but also monitoring the students during each research session for signs to suggesting that an individual no longer wants to participate.
1. Casey Vanderpool says:
  
  September 25, 2018 at 7:29 pm
  
  Tim,
  Your situation does bring up a dilemma that lots of us do not have to face, but I think your idea for monitoring the situation is something all of us can use.
  
  During reading, one thing I found interesting is what Nolan and Putten (2007) had to say about the relationship between the student and the teacher-researcher. I found it interesting to think that not only might students feel uncomfortable if they choose not to consent, but their feelings about their teacher can also influence their willingness to participate. Both their negative and positive histories could affect the accuracy or validity of the response. Perhaps you are that student’s favorite teacher, and they feel strongly that they know the answer/result you’re hoping for so they may skew their responses to reflect that. This was not necessarily anything I had ever considered before. As researchers, we have to be careful to word our questions without influential language and develop methodologies that do not lead students to infer “desired” results.
  
  In reflecting on these ethical issues, I can see how easy it is for teachers to feel intimidated by action research and all of the gray areas involved. I think the authors made great suggestions of additional training and a document that specifically addresses these issues.
2. Justin Bartlett says:
  
  October 4, 2018 at 2:57 pm
  
  Tim, you highlighted some important points from the article. I think the main concern for me is the informed consent for students. I know that we have to provide informed consent with any project or experiment that is being conducted but my main issue is that the parents will deny permission of their child being included in a study. If we are doing educational research, especially action research, it will be hard for us to get a good population of students that will allow us to conduct purposeful research.
  You noted that one area of improvement that the authors of the article stated was that members of the IRB become more knowledgeable of the practices of action research. I truly agree with this as it seems to be the go to choice of educators who want to conduct research on a practice or change in the classroom. It goes along with the notion of more professional development needed within the field and also those who are connected. I believe that if the IRB board was able to see how beneficial action research is and how much data and information could be gathered, there would definitely be a change in the rules and regulations that come with approving a research project.
  One last point that I truly appreciated was making a clear and concise judgement as an educator when it comes to being ethical and protecting the rights of the students. I believe that as an educator, one of our many priorities is to maintain safety and make sure that students’ best interest is put forth. Following proper protocol and procedure will help alleviate the majority of ethics involved. We use our best judgement every day in the classroom so this will be no different.
Erik Laursen says:

September 24, 2018 at 10:32 am

Thank you for a comprehensive and insightful lead blog. I appreciate your analysis of each element of ethics – consent, respect, etc. The name of each element may at first glance seem so clear, though they in reality require reflection in order to follow.
While the authors do not offer suggestions to your dilemma regarding consent, I think your suggestion on how to handle it is perfect. Thank you for thinking through this!
Molly Hulihan says:

September 26, 2018 at 5:22 pm

Tim,

After reading this article it made me think a lot about the population of students we serve and those that we want to participate in our study. One thing that stuck out to me was about informed consent. Even if students do consent, do they really understand what they are consenting to or why? This could be for typically developing students or students with a disability. I have never thought about students choosing or not choosing to participate in a study done by their teacher due to feeling pressured, but I can now imagine how this could happen. If participants are not fully consenting or consenting because they feel like their teacher will like them better or wants them to, then the results of the study might be skewed. For students who are younger and are getting consent from parents, are the parents asking their child if they want to participate?

Another thing that is so important is storing data and the aspect of confidentiality for students. I feel as if we have a great system to keep student confidentiality, but it made me wonder how other teachers keep their data and make sure it is stored in a safe place.

Lastly, I could not agree more about what you said for consent for our students. The students from my classroom are all adults whose parents have full guardianship. Even though the parents can consent for them, I think it is our job to not only ask the students if they want to participate, but monitor student activity and make sure the student wants to be there. This can be difficult for students who are non-verbal and do not understand the meaning of yes and no, but I think we have a good feel for our students and whether they are ready to participate in an activity or not.

Comments are closed.