Travelers and Trolls: Practitioner Research and Institutional Review Boards
Open Access
- 1 April 2002
- journal article
- Published by American Educational Research Association (AERA) in Educational Researcher
- Vol. 31 (3), 3-13
- https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x031003003
Abstract
Practitioner research is a growing form of educational research that presents distinctive ethical issues concerning the protection of research subjects. These issues are also evident in similar forms of action-oriented research carried out in natural settings. Some Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) have been criticized for drawing inappropriate conclusions in their reviews of proposed practitioner research projects. This article seeks to explain some of the factors creating the conflicts and misunderstandings among practitioner researchers and IRBs in hopes of ameliorating these difficulties. Although some difficulties are readily resolvable, fundamental societal rifts exist in the ethical perspectives from which judgments about the ethical propriety of such projects should be made, and the disputes derived from these rifts are not so easy to fix.Keywords
This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- Time to cut regulations that protect only regulatorsNature, 2001
- The Role of Assessment in a Learning CultureEducational Researcher, 2000
- Ethics in Qualitative Research: Multicultural Feminist Activist ResearchTheory Into Practice, 2000
- Being at the Wrong Place, Wrong Time: Rethinking Trust in Qualitative InquiryTheory Into Practice, 2000
- Qualitative research in health care: Using qualitative methods in health related action researchBMJ, 2000
- The Teacher Research Movement: A Decade LaterEducational Researcher, 1999
- Ethics in Educational ResearchReview of Research in Education, 1999
- Ethics, Institutional Review Boards, and the Changing Face of Educational ResearchEducational Researcher, 1993