Alison Foxa, Jim Askhamb and Rachel Tunstallb,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Year Two Year Three Year One Research methods teaching in the social sciences: An integrated approach to inquiry- based learning.
Advertisements

Building Community Representative and Partner Capacity and Capability to Support New CPP Structures Kirsty Duerden.
RE and the new primary curriculum. “RE has an important role in preparing children for adult life, employment and lifelong learning. It enables them to.
Obtaining Informed Consent: 1. Elements Of Informed Consent 2. Essential Information For Prospective Participants 3. Obligation for investigators.
Recruitment of online tutors Sharon Slade, Fenella Galpin OU Business School.
Ethics in Business Research
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics Report : The collection, linking and use of data in biomedical research and health care: ethical issues. Martin Richards.
Portfolio based assessment - options for the new CGEA.
Filming protocols. Your school policy Do you have a school filming and or photography Policy ? We would like to see a copy of this to ensure that the.
Canadian English LING 202, Fall 2007 Dr. Tony Pi Research Ethics.
LIFE Brusselles Meeting 23rd, 24th September 2010.
Marketing / Law / Digital Keith Arrowsmith. Court ActionPress Complaints CommissionTrading StandardsGambling Commission.
Members’ Council Elections 2016 Your chance to get involved and make a difference!
Advancing Ethics Frameworks and Scenario Development to Support e- Research in Educational Contexts Jocelyn Wishart.
Hampshire FA Equality Action Plan Overview
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
Unit 5 Understand how to work in partnership
Making the most of your culture surveys
REFLECT: Recovery Following Intensive Care Treatment
Ethical Issues in Psychological Research
NETT Recruitment-Admissions Interactive Review Congruence Survey for case study 1 Relationship between recruitment and admissions activity.
Continuing Professional Development Assessor Briefing
Results of Patient Survey
Stakeholder consultations
What makes our course engaging for our students?
Writing your reflection in Stage 1 & 2 Indonesian (continuers)
Research on human biological materials: Lithuanian perspective
Implementing and reviewing additional admissions assessments
Equality and diversity – session 2
Within Trial Decisions: Unblinding and Termination
Aboriginal Learning, Surrey Schools January 31, 2017
SSP4000 Introduction to the Research Process Wk9: Introduction to qualitative research, Part 2 The focus of week 9 is to introduce students to the characteristics.
Culture and Communication at Aston: helping staff and students to learn with and from people of different backgrounds Aston University 2011.
Academic representative Committee CHAIR training
National Coalition Building Institute Information Session
Consent, throughout the Early Help Journey
ST3004: Research Methods Ethics and Writing your Proposal
Research Ethics Matthew Billington
Business and Management Research
© 2016 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Staff Feedback Forum 3pm-5pm, 22 March 2017
Handout 4: Understand the structure of customer service
Writing the Methods Section
Research Ethics & Sources of Information
Research Ethics and Integrity Officer
ScHARR Bite Size Research Ethics and GDPR: legal requirements for research - what you need to know.
Learning Link Scotland
Why are you collecting data in the first place
The Power of Authentic Engagement NH SSIP Team Meeting December 16, 2016 Joanne Cashman, Ed. D
Sharing can happen on different levels; within an organisation, within a closed but controlled set of actors, or - the point of no return - freely shared.
The Art of Delegation How to get others to do the common things others can do, so you can get on to the greater things that only you can do.
Statistics Governance and Quality Assurance: the Experience of FAO
How to undertake an Early Help Strength based conversation
GDPR Please don’t panic!
Workforce Engagement Survey
Code of Conduct for Staff Members
Business and Management Research
What’s in this presentation
GDPR – General Data Protection Regulation
Strategy
Consent, throughout the Early Help Journey
Creation of a rationale
FINANCING NATURA 2000 Agenda item 2.1 CGBN Co-ordination Group
The General Data Protection Regulations 2016
The Early Help Assessment Journey. Request for Early Help Support Form. Support for OUR Early Help Partner Agencies.
EFD-408: Foundations of American Education
How to undertake an Early Help Strength based conversation
ScHARR Bite Size Research Ethics and GDPR: legal requirements for research - what you need to know.
RESEARCH METHODS Lecture 14
How to undertake an Early Help Strength based conversation
Presentation transcript:

High responsibility: The ethics of researching a MOOC about research ethics Alison Foxa, Jim Askhamb and Rachel Tunstallb, The Open University and University of Leicester

We wanted: To research what participants said in response to activities based on a research ethics framework Why: To find out from a diverse group of people how the framework could be used and adapted The issue: How should we gain consent ethically from participants on a course about research ethics? Our options: Be transparent. Ensure all participants know our plans for their participation in a course and a research study from week 1 – would this restrict engagement/make them cross? Introduce the idea in week 1 that participants will be invited to consent to research in week 6 after they have been able to benefit from the course – would they opt out? Introduce the idea in week 1 that participants will be invited to consent to research in week 6. Create a learning opportunity reviewing T and C to discuss what turning from course to research participant feels like – would they opt out/feel cross/offer insights?

‘2. Research into participation in FutureLearn courses presents particular challenges with regard to obtaining consent. Participants must be clearly informed that their participation and interactions may be monitored and analysed for research.’ ‘4. …The contributions were made in the context of an ongoing course discussion. It would normally be expected that research into learner contributions should use anonymised data.’ ‘5. Ownership of data created by learners is a further challenge. Learners own content they create on the FutureLearn platform, which they license to FutureLearn and partners forever and irrevocably. It should be recognised that participants in courses have a moral right of identity with materials created in their name….’ (Extracts from FutureLearn Research Ethics policy)

Our MOOC

OUR RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. What ethical issues do participants on a MOOC exploring research ethics in the social sciences identify from their discussions about case study material?   2. What actions do participants on this MOOC propose in response to the identification of ethical issues? 3. In what ways can any diversity of views related to RQ1 and RQ2 be explained in terms of information provided by course participants? 4. In what ways can the above analysis inform the development and application of the ethical appraisal framework used to underpin the MOOC?

OUR DATA COLLECTION REQUESTS Anonymised use of your learner content offered to the course and held securely by FutureLearn through: comments to steps and through Twitter activity linked to #FLresearchethics Anonymised use of learner analytic data held securely by the Partner Institution in accordance with FutureLearn policies, including responses to quizzes and tests. Any anonymised email activity with course team members which results from participation in the course

WHAT WE SAID… OUR INTRODUCTION: Step 1.2 and week one email: We feel a responsibility on a course about ethics and data collection to recommend that you take some time familiarising yourselves with FutureLearn’s Terms and Conditions, to which you have already agreed. This is particularly relevant to your study of this course as we are proposing to carry out a research study. Your options to opt out of the study will be explained in Week 6. OUR REFLECTION POINT: Step 6.10: We have gained approval for a study on the basis of the earlier questions from our University ethical approval committee, as required by FutureLearn Research Ethics policy. So, what do you think about the proposition that we could, under the Terms and Conditions, collect and analyse the ‘learner content’ you have offered as well as learner analytic data collected behind the scenes about your activity on the site? OUR INFORMED CONSENT OPTIONS: We can offer you the chance to opt-out of requests 1 and 3 but NOT request 2, because the learner analytic data is already anonymized and cannot be linked to your learner content by name. If you are NOT happy to be involved in the use of your data for this research project in relation to requests 1 and 3 above, please follow the instructions below/overleaf…

‘I never really considered agreeing to terms and services and use of the Internet as falling under the definition of "data collection“’ (week 1) WHAT THEY SAID… ‘I don't think all deception is always unethical in research and some amount of deception may be necessary (or unavoidable) in order to prevent participants from holding back information’ (week 1) ‘I did question myself if we are taking part in a covert operation…ahem, I mean research study! ’ (week 2) ‘If questions/comments, posed/raised have contributed to this course, then these should form part of an enquiry into how the ethical framework has been used in this course.’ (week 6) ‘I agreed to whatever Terms and conditions without even looking at it. Now I'm skimming through the Terms and conditions for the very first time.’ (week 6) ‘Although I recognize the legality of having lengthy terms and conditions (in your case 6000 words) I severely question the ethical dimension of producing and using them when you know quite well few people read and understand them in the entirety…So in a way, your use of them in a course on ethics is itself unethical’ (week 6)

Issues arising When should we tell participants? How much should we tell participants? What are the pros and cons of ensuring participants know about the research at the start? What are the pros and cons of telling participants only at the start and reinforcing/explaining in week 6? Is opt-out consent sufficient? Should we offer anonymity or respect rights to participants’ content?

Contact: Alison Fox Alison. fox@open. ac Contact: Alison Fox Alison.fox@open.ac.uk WELS The Open University Walton Hall Milton Keynes MK7 6AA www.open.ac.uk