Students are the most utilized study population among USU researchers. This document is an overview of the ethical considerations involving students as research subjects.
Equitable selection of subjects requires that all research subjects not be selected merely because of their ease of access. Thus, students should not be targeted for research participation because they are convenient to reach. Here are some recommendations for working with students as research participants when they are appropriate for inclusion in your research project, with a focus on avoiding atmospheres of coercion or undue influence.
College & University Populations
In general, working with students in your own department can create an atmosphere of undue influence. If students in your department are the most appropriate pool for your research study, that should be evident to the IRB reviewer in your proposal (for Expedited or Full Board projects) or hypotheses/research questions (for Exempt projects). Researchers should incorporate the following recommendations into recruitment, informed consent process, and study procedures.
- Bring in another person, ideally from another department, to conduct recruitment and informed consent processes. A colleague who does not have a status relationship with your students is unlikely to present an atmosphere of undue influence when presenting the research participation opportunity. This person must have CITI training and be added to your protocol.
- Consider whether obtaining de-identified course data from Teaching & Learning Technologies will address your research question. The Office of Teaching & Learning Technologies has a process for requesting de-identified student data that is housed in Canvas. This approach allows researchers access to more comprehensive data (as it does not rely on an informed consent process in many cases) while avoiding any atmosphere of undue influence with students.
- Do not recruit until after the semester has ended. This allows your students to proceed with business as usual throughout the course, and gives them time away from the class to make a reasoned and uninfluenced decision about whether their efforts should be used in your research. If your study design demands research engagement during the semester, researchers are encouraged to request a consultation with the Human Research Protections Office to ensure minimization of undue influence, if complete avoidance is simply not possible.
- Consider recruiting through SONA, instead of your class. The Psychology Department at USU maintains SONA, which allows instructors who register their courses to SONA to know that a student participated in a research project, but no additional details. Using SONA ensures that a student has voluntarily opted in to a study and maintains that student’s privacy outside of the research team. Students complete SONA studies for class or extra credit for courses that make this option available to them. Any faculty member can request a SONA account online.
- Extra credit must be consistent and fair. Extra credit is compensation, and as such, it must be consistent among research participants. Ambiguous promises of extra credit at an instructor’s discretion does not allow for a fully informed consent process. Researchers looking to compensate students with extra credit must: 1) secure an agreement from all relevant instructors whereby the compensation to participants is equal among the participants; and 2) ensure that an alternative extra credit opportunity is identified and made available to students during the recruitment process. The alternative can require no more time and effort of the student than the research opportunity would. Consider, too, offering extra credit to students for simply returning a consent form, regardless of their decision to participate.
- Avoid utilizing class time for research procedures. Loss of instructional time or time-on-task for research activities is unethical. Students pay tuition for course enrollment, and in most cases, it is not ethical to have students pay to participate in research. Unless the research opportunity maps on to one of the existing learning objectives for the course in a way that benefits students, time in the classroom or related to classroom activities should not be displaced for research recruitment or procedures.
A dissertation study at USU requested that a panel of experts rate the coerciveness and acceptability of different recruitment procedures with students. While three of the four expert panelists, all professionals in the field of Psychology, rated one scenario as voluntary, most of the student participants who rated the same scenario indicated they would feel forced to participate.1
1. Azure Midzinski. Students’ Perceptions of Coercion in Research. 2010. Utah State University Digital Commons, Paper 583.
Public K-12 Populations
Utah State University is somewhat unique in the number of USU students who also have professional roles in the public K-12 education setting. As such, a large number of student projects at USU look to work in K-12 settings where the USU researcher holds a professional role. As can be the case with USU professors and college students, a professional in a public K-12 setting can hold an unduly influential relationship with the students and parents at their schools – more so than with university students, as children are already a population considered vulnerable to undue influence and coercion. If a member of the research team works in the district or school where the research will take place, please incorporate the following recommendations into your recruitment, informed consent process, and study procedures.
- Avoid using teachers and principals to recruit families. A child spends many hours each day with their teacher, particularly in earlier grades. Parents should not wonder whether agreeing to participate in research will affect their child’s relationship with their teacher or principal. Teachers should avoid research with their own students. Consider having a guidance counselor or the USU faculty member overseeing the project conduct the recruitment and consent processes.
- Avoid utilizing class time for research procedures. Loss of instructional time or time-on-task for an unrelated research activity is unethical. Unless the research opportunity maps on to one of the existing learning objectives for the course in a way that benefits students, time in the classroom or related to classroom activities should not be displaced for research recruitment or procedures. The Utah Education Network makes the Utah Common Core standards available and easily accessible to researchers.
- Be aware of your dual roles and how those roles differ. Remember that teachers, particularly K-12 teachers, have broad rights and responsibilities as to their students. Researchers, however, have much more restricted access. Mingling those roles can raise legal (e.g. FERPA) and ethical (e.g. conflict of interest) concerns that should be discussed with advisors and other experts.
- Obtain the appropriate approvals. District-level approval of any research project in Utah is required before the IRB can formally approve a project. Many districts, both within and outside of Utah, have distinct requirements that all researchers obtain district approval, so researchers should always check with district offices during the planning stages of the research. If the work is in a school and utilizes classroom time and resources, an additional approval from a principal may be necessary, indicating that the activities have been reviewed and do not pose a risk to students in terms of lost instructional time and effort.
- Separation of participants and non-participants should not be obvious. Many studies are appropriate for classroom settings, but not every parent or guardian will consent to have their child participate. Where procedures can be the same for both participants and non-participants, privacy of research subjects is maximized. Some research procedures, however, must be differentiated – for example, videos or photos of children engaging in research activities must be sure to exclude students whose families have not consented to participate. Have a plan for how that separation will take place without “singling out” those who are (or are not) participating.
- Home languages must be identified and accommodated. Students whose parents do not speak or read English in the home must be identified and treated the same as English-speaking families. While students engaged in the project might speak English, their parents (who give informed consent for the students’ participation in most cases) may not. Equitable selection of subjects and Respect for persons requires that these individuals not be treated differently, which is especially the case where there are research-related benefits to participation. Plan ahead for obtaining translations, where needed.
Conclusion
There are many ways to work to minimize atmospheres of coercion and undue influence when utilizing student populations in research. The lists above are the minimum steps the USU IRB will expect researchers to implement in their studies, but researchers also know their students well and should be active in designing a structure that permits students freedom to engage fully in their educational environments while ensuring voluntariness in research.
Researchers should also consider review timelines during their planning process. Familiarization with Exempt Category 1 and the Expedited categories for review are especially encouraged. Exempt protocols are typically complete within one week, while Expedited protocols are usually 3-6 weeks – the longer end of that process almost always depends on the researchers obtaining district approvals to conduct their research.
This guidance is specific to ethical considerations regarding undue influence and coercion, and it is important for researchers to remember that other legal considerations must also feature prominently in any study design utilizing student populations. The Family Educational Rights & Privacy Act, the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, the Utah Student Survey Amendments, and Utah Student Privacy & Data Protection laws are only some of the requirements that attach to educational settings in Utah. Most states have an office dealing with student privacy at the state level, and consultations with those offices are highly encouraged. Utah’s Student Data Privacy Office makes many trainings and resources available to all stakeholders in Utah, and is a wonderful resource for, in particular, K-12 researchers.