Article 3: A Re-examination of the Relationship between Action Research and Human Subjects Review Processes

September 27 – October 3: The lead blogger is Molly, who will post her blog by Sunday midnight. Follow-up blogs are due Wednesday midnight.

5 Responses to "Article 3: A Re-examination of the Relationship between Action Research and Human Subjects Review Processes"

Molly Hulihan says:

September 30, 2018 at 6:27 pm

This article, by Mary Brydon-Miller and Davydd Greenwood, discusses concerns with using human subjects in action research. The institutional review boards (IRB) help to regulate research projects, but it can get tricky when human subjects are involved. There are studies in the past that helped establish the need for IRBs, but the first clear statement was the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (Brydon-Miller & Greenwood, 2006). This stated that research needed to have IRB review in order to use federal funds.

The goal of the IRB is to put an end to abusive behavior in research. Universities are extra careful to follow IRB forms and rules, in order to try and avoid liability issues and to ensure that there is no harm to human subjects. According to the article, A Re-examination of the Relationship Between Action Research and Human Subjects Review Processes, action research presents a different problem than other types of research when it comes to IRB approval. Action research is more open-ended, collaborative, and might not have a specific process, which can make it hard for the IRBs to grant permission for a study. IRBs want everything to be laid out prior to the study starting, but that is not always fair. Even in conventional research studies there can be some guessing and times where researchers are not correct with their hypotheses.

In action research participation is often times collaborative and the research plan can change throughout. This can make it difficult for the IRB to approve studies since they do not know where the study might go at times. Since there is not a whole lot of control in action research the authors suggest submitting an initial idea to the IRB and then add amendments to the study as it progresses. The only problem with this is it can take the IRB time to get back to the researchers and at which point the study has already continued to progress. Another suggestion is to have a liaison that can answer questions quickly and help guide the study as new ideas progress.

One major concern for researchers in the action research field is that many researchers decide not to even go through with an action research project due to difficulty trying to gain IRB approval. Instead of putting in the work and seeing if they can get approved, researchers just give up or avoid research topics that could cause controversy. One way to help this is to be honest with participants and let them know what is going on in the IRB process and making them aware that the whole process is being used to protect their rights as humans participating in the study.

As for confidentiality and credit in action research and the IRB process, it is important to communicate with participants and see what they want. A lot of times the researchers assume that participants want to be kept confidential, but sometimes participants want to be known as collaborators. To avoid any IRB issues here, researchers should simply ask participants how they wish to be addressed in the research report.

Coercion is another concern of the IRB when they are reviewing action research proposals. One major question the authors mentioned is, “how can these researchers provide assurances that the individuals with whom they wish to conduct the study do not feel pressured to participate?” (Brydon-Miller & Greenwood, 2006). Especially in classrooms teachers must make sure they use precautions to ensure students do not feel like their grade will change or they will be favored if they do or do not participate. One way to do this is to have another teacher distribute and collect forms so the main research is unaware of who is actually participating until the study is over.

Overall, the IRB is there to ensure human rights are protected. There may be strategies to continue to improve IRB approval and the approval is just the first step in the whole process. Truly it is up to the researchers to ensure good ethics in their studies and they can do this by starting with a consent form that explains the process and the risks involved with the study.

I found this article interesting and informative as we are preparing our form for IRB approval. It does seem like such a daunting process so I can see how people decide just not to go through with it. I think without the help of Dr. Laursen and my group, I would have felt even more stressed upon seeing the IRB form and consent form. I think that if this was made easier than more teachers might be open to implementing action research in their classrooms. I also am a little concerned about what will happen if the IRB does not approve our research project. Since we are on such a tight schedule and would like to start collecting data soon, I do not know what we would do if we are not approved. Overall, I think we have an excellent consent form that the IRB will look at and feel comfortable with our study and how we are informing parents and participants in our study. I think most researchers have their participants best interest at heart, but I understand that there have been studies in the past that have affected the way the IRB approves and that there are some people out their that do not use their research to the best interest of their participants.
1. Casey Vanderpool says:
  
  October 1, 2018 at 6:27 pm
  
  One major take away I had from this article was the distinction between the ethics of making decisions during the study and deciding what to do with the information in the researcher report or presentation (Brydon-Miller & Greenwood, 2006). The decisions made about what to do during the study are not what make the unknown part unethical. The decision about how or what to report and include in the findings are the troublesome areas. As teachers, if we are trying out a new teaching strategy, it is unethical to provide instruction using a proven best practice to certain students and withhold the strategy from others. When discussing with my research partner what to do for students whose parent/guardian does not consent to their participation in the study, the solution was not to teach them using a different strategy. They would be taught the skill with the same teaching strategy; however, their data would not be used in the final report.
  
  I think many of us share the same concerns about not being approved for our study. A benefit to action research is the collaboration piece. With so many educators working together to provide good instruction and a safe environment for students, it seems like we have a good starting point.
2. Timothy Corallo says:
  
  October 2, 2018 at 9:11 pm
  
  Molly, great synopsis of the article! I also think this was helpful in helping to plan and prepare all the documents we needed for the IRB. I think you make an excellent point in saying that while most researchers have their participants best interests at heart, there are some researchers who may not. Even researchers who have their participants best interest at heart may unwittingly do something that is unethical. For example, I would venture to say that Stanley Milgram (whose experiment on obedience to authority is referenced in the article as an example of unethical treatment of human subjects) did not feel that his experiment was unethical to his participants. He was trying to uncover a difficult truth regarding how far people would go when they were following orders from an authority figure. However, in actuality, his participants were definitely caused undue psychological (and some limited physical) distress. Had this research been required to be reviewed and approved by an IRB, his participants would not have been subjected to undue distress. While IRBs may hinder action research to some extent, I still feel they are necessary is helping protect human research participants.
Samantha Muse says:

October 4, 2018 at 8:37 am

“One major concern for researchers in the action research field is that many researchers decide not to even go through with an action research project due to difficulty trying to gain IRB approval. Instead of putting in the work and seeing if they can get approved, researchers just give up or avoid research topics that could cause controversy.”

I think this is a major concern. It is hard when human participants are involved because if what you are doing doesnt work they way you think it will, you don’t want it to hurt them in the long run. For example, if you want to try a new way to teach a math concept and it doesnt work, your students may be a week or more behind the other classrooms because they didn’t understand the new strategy. This is something that the IRB wants you to be aware of and wants the participants to be aware of before they begin the study.

I also agree that this process is overwhelming. All of us who are working on this together have full time jobs, it’s the beginning of the school year and were trying to iron out the details on how we are going to be completing this research. On top of all of that, the IRB approval process is something all of us are nervous about. The idea that putting so much time into something that may not be approved is scary, however, I think what we sent to them is very well planned out and they will let us start soon!
Justin Bartlett says:

October 4, 2018 at 1:52 pm

Molly, you covered some great topics in your post. I think the biggest take away for me was the fact that action research is very difficult to gain approval from the IRB. Then when you have counties like Henrico who are very strict with their rules and regulations for research, it makes it difficult to even begin this. What I do appreciate about the IRB is that its helps with protecting human rights. Because people can be taken advantage of, it makes it extremely easy for the IRB to shut it down. I feel as though with the IRB and action research, there is a lot of red tape that seems to prohibit us from doing a full research, but I feel as though with the right tools and the right information, the IRB will help us to conduct a full, effective research project.

Comments are closed.