The Ethics of Evaluating Instructional Computing
Marvin J. Croy
4. Minimizing the Risks to Students
There is no doubt that, even when students are treated as rational agents, there is a power and authority differential between those students and their instructors. With this in mind, instructors carrying out in-class research should do whatever is feasible to reduce the risks to students, even when those actions appear to have limited impact or are not absolutely required. For example, proposals for instructional research should be submitted to university “research with human subjects” committees for evaluation. Many universities exempt instructional research from evaluation by these committees. Federal policy, as stated in the Federal Register, supports this decision by virtue of the following category of exemption: “Research conducted in established or commonly accepted educational settings, involving normal educational practices, such as (i) research on regular and special education instructional strategies, or (ii) research on the effectiveness of or the comparison among instructional techniques, curricula, or classroom management methods.”(20) Nevertheless, university committees of this type often include student representatives and it is important for instructors to make use of this source of feedback. In addition, it is a good idea to post notices of the intended research in the schedule of classes indicating that research will take place in a particular course or section. Doing so will probably have little positive impact, but the potential for having some impact weighted against the near-zero cost makes this action reasonable.21 Some universities even allow students enrolled in a course involving controlled research to retake the course free of charge. These examples illustrate what should be the researcher’s guiding principle: reduce the risks to students whenever doing so is feasible even if the anticipated benefits are minor.
One question raised by this discussion is whether it is possible to evaluate instructional techniques without any risks at all to students. This possibility is suggested by the following scenario. An instructor teams up with a psychologist who has access to a large pool of students for use as experimental subjects. This often occurs, for example, in large introductory psychology classes. These subjects are randomly assigned to groups which are taught a given subject matter by different techniques. Comparisons of the results are then used for purposes of evaluating the different pedagogical techniques. Since these students have not signed up for a course in the subject matter being taught, the rights and responsibilities of those involved are substantially altered, and it appears that many of the ethical difficulties associated with instructional evaluation can be avoided. This is not to say, however, that ethical questions concerning the appropriateness of requiring introductory psychology students to serve as research subjects disappear. Nor is it to say that this scenario is practical in many situations. But this line of thinking is representative of the attitude that researchers should adopt when stepping into the classroom to evaluate instructional techniques, and it is indicative of the concern for student interests which should be interwoven into their research efforts. Creative thinking about ways of reducing the risks to students should be both encouraged and applauded. Such thinking will eventually produce results.
Home > Teaching Resources > Computer Ethics Issues in Academic Computing > The Ethics of Evaluating Instructional Computing
HOME | IN
THE NEWS | RESEARCH
RESOURCES
TEACHING RESOURCES | STUDENT
RESOURCES | LINKS
The Research Center on Computing & Society
at Southern Connecticut State University
501 Crescent Street | New Haven, CT 06515
Director: (203) 392-6790 | e-mail: webmaster@computerethics.org
© 2000 – 2004 – Research Center on Computing & Society