Conflict and convergence: The ethics review of action research [Book Review]

Journal of Academic Ethics 4 (1-4):61-75 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The article is based on the author’s experience as an administrator of three primarily social science institutional review boards (IRBs) to which researchers presented research protocols that purported to be minimal risk studies of teacher practice where the “teacher–researcher” was the “research subject.” Recently, educational, social, and behavioral science researchers encounter many problems with regard to their methodologies and the oversight mandate of the IRBs. There is a divergence between the IRB’s role and assumed bio-clinical predisposition and the ability of behavioral and social science researchers to have their research methodologies and research understood and appreciated by IRB members. The article explores some of the dilemmas confronting IRB members and administrators in the review and administration of the action research protocols, particularly those that involve vulnerable populations and which, from the practitioner–researcher’s perspective, focus on the practitioner–researcher as the object of the research.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,261

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Conflicting interests, social justice and proxy consent to research.Daryl Pullman - 2002 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (5):523 – 545.
Students as research participants or as learners?Ling Shi - 2006 - Journal of Academic Ethics 4 (1-4):205-220.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
34 (#472,683)

6 months
8 (#370,225)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations