sponsored at WU, then considering s

sponsored at WU, then considering some form of IRB review
would be warranted. I’ve heard about it being as perfunctory as
a proposal made on behalf of an entire class or program by the
professor or department head to individual proposals submitted
by each class member.
That being said all research doesn’t require approval. It is my
understanding that basic experimental research in the natural
sciences, that does not make use of human subjects, can
proceed without IRB approval. But a significant amount of
other research, most notably research in the arts and social
sciences (involving investigations into human behavior) does
not require IRB approval.
One distinction that I have found helpful in determining if
review is called for is whether or not research (on a human
endeavor) is experimental. Meaning does the study involve
some sort of manipulation by the researcher--a manipulation
which would not have occurred other wise and would not have
involved a set of individuals were it not for the conduct of the
experiment. In my opinion all experiments on humans
should ALWAYS receive approval.
But what of other types of research into human endeavors?
Such as research into works of art and artistic movements?
Certainly the works were created by humans, but the work was
not done at the request of the researcher, for the researcher,
and would have been none even if the researcher never
existed. Another example is that of historical research or
journalism. Certainly the historian is reporting on the acts of
humans. But, these were all acts that were engaged in
independent of the researcher (historian/journalist) and would
have occurred whether or not the events became an issue of
scholarly inquiry. A reporter is a researcher, but hardly an
experimenter!
Perhaps closest to home is the example of anthropology and
other naturalistic cultural studies. The anthropologist clearly is
reporting on the lives, actions, even the words of the humans.
The humans the anthropologist has chosen to report on were
not chosen at random, they were, in fact chosen because they
were representative of a sample (a particular culture).
Nevertheless, the very methodology of the ethnographer
demands that efforts be made to ensure that no manipulation
occur. The entire validity of the report hinges on the fact that
what was observed was what was and would have been
occurring naturally--with or without the presence of the
recorder.
Is action research experimental research?
With a few exceptions (which I will discuss later) it rarely meets
the definition of experimental research, at least as I've defined
it here. An experiment being defined as providing services to
students or exposing them to certain conditions solely because
the teacher was doing an action research project. As I stated in
chapter 12 of the book---I have some serious ethical concerns
about experimental designs (particularly treatment and control
designs) in school settings. In my opinion every teacher has a
moral obligation, every single day they are in the classroom, to
utilize the best approach/techniques they know how. When a
teacher uses an approach they wouldn't normally use (because
they are doing research) they are violating their sacred
obligation to the kids. Likewise, to deny kids an approach that
their teacher believes is in their interest (solely to create a
control group) is an equally heinous violation of our duties as
teachers.
It is for this reason (that in nearly every case-the exception to be
discussed below) I assume that the teacher conducting action
research is exposing his/her kids to nothing different than the
kids would have been experiencing if the teacher was not being
systematic about collecting and analyzing data on the impact of
their teaching.
Are there subjects in educational action research?
In my opinion, to the degree that there is a "subject" being placed
under my microscope as a teacher researcher, it is me. The
object that I am studying is "my teaching behavior." Yes, the work
done by the students, even the opinions expressed by the
students may be windows (data) into the efficacy of the behavior
of the subject of my research. But, in no way is this different way
than the recipient of medical treatment is the recipient of the
doctor's practice and the client of the lawyer is a recipient of the
lawyer's practice. If the doctor and lawyer are performing just as
they would have (if they weren't in the habit of being reflective
practitioners) then there is no experimental manipulation going
on. If the doctor, lawyer, or teacher elect to reflect on their
practice (making use of the results of their work—to draw
conclusions) and even if they later report on what they learned, it
still doesn't constitute an experimental manipulation. Instead the
doctor, lawyer, teacher is reporting on their routine practice.
Are these the only legal and ethical issues we need to be
concerned with?
Absolutely not! Whether it be the naturalistic research of a
journalist, a historian, an anthropologist or a teacher the research
can and often does have unintended consequences for the
individuals and communities that were reported on. While their
behavior would have been the same with or without a reporter
being there to chronicle it, once the behavior is reported it can
produce numerous anticipated and unintended consequences
(basic chaos theory). The impact of reporting can be both
positive and negative. For this reason both the law and our
ethical strictures should control all of our decisions on
confidentiality and anonymity.
Once again, this is an issue that concerns teachers whether or
not they ever venture into the arena of action research. Student
work, grades, their faces, their opinions, etc., etc. belong to them
and to them alone. Allowing a student to be identified (even if it is
identified for something positive) without prior un-coerced student
and parental consent is wrong (and often illegal) and this will be
the case even if an IRB ruled otherwise.
Note: Earlier I said there were limited circumstances when action
research might be experimental yet, still ethical and (arguably)
not subject to IRB approval. This usually occurs when a decision
needs to be made by the school authorities ---in circumstances
when authorities will be asked to make an informed choice
among alternative programs or strategies. It is not uncommon for
this to occur, even in schools which have never heard of Action
Research. Often in such circumstances a variety of alternative
approaches are piloted, results are reviewed and, ultimately, a
decision is made on how to proceed. When this happens the
student who experiences one program (as opposed to another)
simply because it is being piloted in their room is certainly being
subject to a manipulation (having an experience) that wouldn't