Research in learning settings may involve research in the tradition of scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) research, or other 'close to practice' approaches (e.g. action research, design research, etc.). In this kind of research there are power dynamics between researchers who may be both researcher and teacher, placing them in a position of power over their potential participants. Even in research conducted by researchers, but delivered via educators (e.g., through their use of research materials in class, or through their provision of research instruments such as surveys) who may act as 'gatekeepers' to the participants, these power relations may endure. Mediation by technologies is likely to alter these relationships in complex ways.“Because Instructors typically conduct SoTL in their classrooms (current or former), SoTL practitioners frequently find themselves in the dual role of instructor and researcher. Ultimately, the instructor-researcher in SoTL is an instructor first. As MacLean and Poole (2010, pg. 3) explain, “The teacher’s responsibility to hold students’ educational interests paramount provides an important perspective when considering ethical issues for research in teaching and learning.” This dual role can raise a set of specific ethical dilemmas that require instructor-researchers to plan parts of the research carefully and to ask themselves challenging questions. Potential ethical dilemmas can arise concerning the following areas of ethical consideration. In the table below, we articulate several core principles for ethical practice that respond to these potentially dilemmatic areas of consideration and elaborate on them in the remainder of the document.” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 4)“Dual roles of researchers and their associated obligations (e.g., acting as both a researcher and a therapist, health care provider, caregiver, teacher, advisor, consultant, supervisor, student or employer) may create conflicts, undue influences, power imbalances or coercion that could affect relationships with others and affect decision-making procedures (e.g., consent of participants). Article
1. 2(e) reminds researchers of relevant ethical duties that govern real, potential or perceived conflicts of interest as they relate to the consent of participants. To preserve and not abuse the trust on which many professional relationships rest, researchers should be fully cognizant of conflicts of interest that may arise from their dual or multiple roles, their rights and responsibilities, and how they can manage the conflict. When acting in dual or multiple roles, the researcher shall disclose the nature of the conflict to the
participant
we use participant to refer to those choosing to participate in research, those where consent-waivers may be in place or where some stakeholders may fulfil participant-researcher roles (e.g., teachers), and those 'data subjects' whose data is used in research often without their knowledge.
in the consent process” (TCPS2, Chapter 7, D. Researchers and Conflicts of Interest).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 5)“The approach to recruitment is an important element in assuring voluntariness. In particular, how, when and where participants are approached, and who recruits them are important elements in assuring (or undermining) voluntariness. In considering the voluntariness of consent, REBs and researchers should be cognizant of situations where undue influence, coercion, or the offer of incentives may undermine the voluntariness of a participants’ consent to participate in research” (TCPS2, Chapter 3, A. General Principles, “Consent Should Be Given Voluntarily”).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 7)“Consent shall be maintained throughout the research project. Researchers have an ongoing duty to provide participants with all information relevant to their ongoing consent to participate in the research” (TCPS2, Chapter 3, A. General Principles, “Consent Shall Be an Ongoing Process”).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 8)“Taking into account the scope and objectives of their research, researchers should be inclusive in selecting participants. Researchers shall not exclude individuals from the opportunity to participate in research on the basis of attributes such as culture, language, religion, race, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, linguistic proficiency, gender or age, unless there is a valid reason for the exclusion. Application ... The focus, objective, nature of research and context in which the research is conducted inform the inclusion and exclusion criteria for a specific research project... Other examples include research focused on specific cultural traditions or languages, or on one age group...Such research should not be precluded so long as the selection criteria for those included in the research are germane to answering the research question. Researchers who plan to actively exclude particular groups should clarify to their REBs the grounds for the exclusion” (TCPS2, Chapter 4, A. Appropriate Inclusion).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 9)“Researchers should anticipate, to the best of their ability, needs of participants, groups and their communities that might arise in any given research project. ... Researchers should consider ways to ensure the equitable distribution of any benefits of participation in research” (TCPS2, Chapter 4, B. Inappropriate Exclusion, “Participants’ Vulnerability and Research”).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 9)“Researchers should normally provide copies of publications, or other research reports or products, arising from the research to the institution or organization – normally the host institution – that is best suited to act as a repository and disseminator of the results within the participating communities. This may not be necessary for jurisdictions where the results are readily available in print or electronically. In general, researchers should ensure that participating individuals, groups and communities are informed of how to access the results of the research. Results of the research should be made available to them in a culturally appropriate and meaningful format, such as reports in plain language in addition to technical reports” (TCPS2, Chapter 4, B. Inappropriate Exclusion, “Equitable Distribution of Research Benefits”).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 10)“Researchers shall safeguard information entrusted to them and not misuse or wrongfully disclose it. Institutions shall support their researchers in maintaining promises of confidentiality” (TCPS2, Chapter 5, B. Ethical Duty of Confidentiality).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 11)“Researchers shall describe measures for meeting confidentiality obligations and explain any reasonably foreseeable disclosure requirements: a. in application materials they submit to the REB; and b. during the consent process with prospective participants” (TCPS2, Chapter 5, B. Ethical Duty of Confidentiality).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 11)“Researchers shall provide details to the REB regarding their proposed measures for safeguarding information, for the full life cycle of information: its collection, use, dissemination, retention and/or disposal” (TCPS2, Chapter 5, C. Safeguarding Information).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 12)“Institutions or organizations where research data are held have a responsibility to establish appropriate institutional security safeguards” (TCPS2, Chapter 5, C. Safeguarding Information).” (Fedoruk, 2017, p. 12)