Pierre Boulos PhD CAREB 2015 Pre-Conference Workshop

1. Conducting research using our own children, ahem, I mean our own students, as participants Pierre Boulos PhD CAREB 2015 Pre-Conference Workshop

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

3. Why engage in research ethics?

4. 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 Definitions

5. 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

6. 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

7. A Quick word about Core Principles Core principles adapted from Belmont • Respect for Persons • Informed consent, Voluntariness, Avoid coercion • Beneficence/Welfare • Risk/Benefits • Justice • Recruitment –burden and benefits of research shared equally 4th Suggested: 4. Respect for Community

8. Case example

9. 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.

10. 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?

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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?

14. 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?

15. STOP, Stay Calm, Think • Think of one ethical issue that may arise out of the research design • Share it with a neighbour

16. 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

17. 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?

18. Research Design: Case-crossover study • Modify the design into a case cross-over study • Baseline—random assignment—cross over Mid-term Baseline Tx1 TX1 Outcome TX2 TX2

19. 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?

20. Constructive Alignment

21. 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

22. Ethics Issues: Confidentiality and Consent • How to use student feedback data designed for curriculum use, not research use

23. Research Design • Final analysis with baseline and final course grade and assessment combined with qualitative feedback

24. Ethics Issues: Confidentiality and Feedback to participants When? How?

25. 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

26. 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)

27. 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)

28. 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/Hospitals www.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

29. 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 Resources