Ethical engagement with students in higher education research Dr Camille B. Kandiko Howson Senior Lecturer in Higher Education King’s College London @cbkandiko

Research about / with / for / on students Researching learning gain Overview Research about / with / for / on students Researching learning gain Student engagement Triangle of doom Ethics RCTs, What Works, Nudge Theory

Research about students Students as data points or data sources

Research about students REF High status, global impact, (some) funding ?

Research with students Student engagement Co-design Co-creation Students as partners Partnership Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Research with students

Research with students REF Low status, low impact, little funding

Research for students Student information, advice and guidance Learner analytics Nudge behaviours

Research for students REF Impact case study?

Research on students Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) Quantitative findings Students manipulatative; universities as petri dish

Research on students REF High status, global impact, increasing funding ? ? ? ?

Learning Gain Pilot Projects HEFCE/OfS funded 13 mixed method projects involving 70 institutions over three years, using: Learner analytics/Grades Self-reported surveys Standardised tests Multiple measures of a specific theme National Mixed Methodology Learning Gain Project (NMMLGP) Higher Education Learning Gain Analysis (HELGA)

Learning Gain Findings Balance between methodological precision and practical collection and application of data Challenges of participation Engagement depends on embedding into the curriculum And loads more! Higher Education Pedagogies

Triangle of Doom

Triangle of Doom Data Protection GDPR Data Sharing Research Ethics

Research ethics Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) blunt research designs that ignore context and experience; tend to generate simplistic universal laws of ‘cause and effect’; inherently descriptive and contribute little to theory (Connolly et al 2018) Importance of process evaluation (Siddiqui et al 2018)

Research ethics What Works Policy Why searching for 'what works' is a wild goose chase (Dennis, 2018) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (Ioannidis, 2005) What students want? What is good for them? Importance of context and individuals Policy OfS commissioning an independent Evidence and Impact Exchange (EIX) – a ‘What Works Centre’ to promote access, success and progression for underrepresented groups of students

Research ethics Behavioural insights/ Nudge Theory Manipulation, control of freedom, moral autonomy Ethical, legal and empirical questions “What is counted as evidence and who is granted the authority of expertise to make behavioural policy decisions” (MacKay 2016) Nudge and research ethics procedures (institutional review board, BERA guidelines etc) Most of the ethical pieces on nudge theory…are written by its proponents

Questions What kind of pedagogical research is needed? Who funds it? How does ‘impact on teaching and learning’ drive the ‘research impact’ debate? What role should students have in research about, with, for, and on them? Who are the ethical guardians of higher education research?

Seek, ask and report on feedback Provide opportunities for students Engage Students! Challenge students Support students Inform students Seek, ask and report on feedback Provide opportunities for students Hold students responsible Work WITH not FOR students

References Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLOS Medicine 2(8): e124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 Dennis, N. (2018). Why searching for 'what works' is a wild goose chase (2 September). The Times Education Supplement. Siddiqui, N., Gorard, S., & See, B. H. (2018). The importance of process evaluation for randomised control trials in education. Educational Research, 60(3), 357-370. Connolly, P., Keenan, C., & Urbanska, K. (2018). The trials of evidence-based practice in education: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials in education research 1980–2016. Educational Research, 60(3), 276-291. MacKay,K. (2016). Behavioural Science in Law & Policy: Evidence, Ethics, & Expertise. Conference, University of Newcastle. https://www.ncl.ac.uk/media/wwwnclacuk/newcastleuniversitylawschool/files/Behavioural%20Workshop%20Newsletter%202016.pdf

© 2015 King’s College London. All rights reserved Dr Camille B. Kandiko Howson @cbkandiko camille.kandiko_howson@kcl.ac.uk © 2015 King’s College London. All rights reserved