next »

[weathered]

A few undergrads approached me and asked me about a particular research topic. It is part of my expertise, so I gave them detailed information and asked why they needed it. They said they were working for professor X, who asked different students to collect data on this subject and get a credit for his course, instead of writing a paper or taking an exam. I know he is writing a book on this topic. It seemed like the professor was using the undergrads to get part of his research done. This is a familiar situation.

A senior colleague at another university would require students to keep reflection journals for his classes. They watch films (usually dark and gloomy) together and students would record their feelings or responses. Then, the professor would collect all their journals and analyze their responses and published articles on them. I know he is going to turn them into a book soon. I am not sure. This kind of research practice seems exploitative. It's like asking students to do bunch of book reviews for the books you need for your own book and using their interpretations and words.

[larryc]

In the Ivory Tower, there can be only one Hall Monitor. And you seem to be it.

[weathered]

You mean, everybody does it, so why should I care?

[msparticularity]

For your reading enjoyment, OP, Title 45 Part 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations--the code regulating research involving human subjects. Among other topics you may find of interest will be the section on what kinds of research are exempt from regulations, the precise definition of "human subject," and the kinds of oversight exercised by the campus IRB.  

Most of all, you will want to bear firmly in mind that if you are approached by someone with this kind of a question, the correct course is to steer them to the IRB on your campus.

[totoro]

A few undergrads approached me and asked me about a particular research topic. It is part of my expertise, so I gave them detailed information and asked why they needed it. They said they were working for professor X, who asked different students to collect data on this subject and get a credit for his course, instead of writing a paper or taking an exam. I know he is writing a book on this topic. It seemed like the professor was using the undergrads to get part of his research done. This is a familiar situation.

A senior colleague at another university would require students to keep reflection journals for his classes. They watch films (usually dark and gloomy) together and students would record their feelings or responses. Then, the professor would collect all their journals and analyze their responses and published articles on them. I know he is going to turn them into a book soon. I am not sure. This kind of research practice seems exploitative. It's like asking students to do bunch of book reviews for the books you need for your own book and using their interpretations and words.

The first one, I see no problem as long as the student's contribution is acknowledged. The second likely needs some research ethics/human subjects approval. Given that, though, there isn't a problem.

[marlborough]

And relying on undergrads to collect data as required work for a class may well be a problem that solves itself if they're not supervised well and do a sloppy job.  I have involved students in peripheral research for what I do, but never anything I did not translate, verify or double check myself. 

[threefive]

In my field, we get awards for doing this well.

[sagit]

Having students get credit for engaging in research by collecting data sounds a heck of a lot more useful to those students than having them take an exam. 

[polly_mer]

In my field, we get awards for doing this well.

This.  Supervising undergraduate research is a solid component of many of the jobs in my field.  Students get listed as coauthors, but students do most of the work.

[hegemony]

Having read umpteen thousand student thoughts on texts and films, I'm dubious whether they're at all helpful in writing a book about the text.  They'll likely be the same basic thoughts over and over, such as (I get this every year), why the knight in "The Seventh Seal" is playing chess with that pale monk who can't even finish the game in one session.  Why doesn't the knight just play with someone else?  He must not play very well and no one else wants to play with him.  (Hey!  I should put these thoughts into a book!)

OP, mistaking student thoughts for the depth of thoughts you need for an academic book suggests to me that you haven't read many student papers.  Or perhaps you are a student?  I guarantee that if you bought a book and found it full of the kind of thoughts that students typically turn in, you'd demand your money back. 

Is stealing the students' deep thoughts about the film which you've made them watch just for these nefarious purposes more of a crime if the film is a dark and gloomy one?  That's the implication of the charge.

[weathered]

Hegemony, the mentioned project was on the analysis of student responses. It's not the content of the movie that is the problem. It's the kind of analysis that is drawn from student writings (fleeting, random, and impulsive). I read the person's article and wasn't sure how much consent he got from students to use their diaries/journals. Basically, the author observed that some students from certain cultural groups had patterns of responses that (often) indicated their moral lack. The argument itself was problematic--a poor psychological study. But more than that why would the author depend so heavily on students responses to get his own work done?

[msparticularity]

Hegemony, the mentioned project was on the analysis of student responses. It's not the content of the movie that is the problem. It's the kind of analysis that is drawn from student writings (fleeting, random, and impulsive). I read the person's article and wasn't sure how much consent he got from students to use their diaries/journals. Basically, the author observed that some students from certain cultural groups had patterns of responses that (often) indicated their moral lack. The argument itself was problematic--a poor psychological study. But more than that why would the author depend so heavily on students responses to get his own work done?

A study of curriculum efficacy uses student responses to evaluate the degree to which a particular pedagogical approach achieves the course objectives. One of the goals of a course might be to see whether watching certain films and having students write about them will lead to the ability to engage in certain kinds of moral/ethical reasoning. In other words, the student responses are data in this kind of a study, and the researcher is "getting his own work done" by evaluating the degree to which a certain educational practice is effective in achieving a desired educational end. 

Also, if you will actually follow the link I provided above and read the law, you will see that the students in this kind of a study are not actually research subjects, since it is the curriculum that is being investigated, rather than them personally. This kind of a study is actually exempt-category, and even if the IRB chooses to oversee it, it is eligible for a waiver of notification and consent.

[pigou]

It very much depends on how their contribution is acknowledged. I think substituting research for writing a paper or taking an exam is generally a bad idea. With papers, the challenging part is critical analysis, which you may not be required to do if all you do is write an annotated bibliography, for example. In any case, their work really has to be acknowledged - is that happening? If their contribution is significant, they should also be listed as co-authors.

That being said, I can't imagine good research coming out of unsupervised undergraduate work. When I worked with faculty as an undergrad, there was a lot of handholding involved to make sure everything was done properly. Professors then spent time explaining to me the implications and assumptions inherent in the analyses or simulations we did and double-checked code, for example. They got some small amount of funding from the university for doing this, but I'm sure they would have been done faster without me around. I was more useful when it came to brainstorming - and I was also listed as co-author. That, to me, was a great model of how to involve undergrads in research.

The second example would certainly need IRB approval. More importantly, I can't imagine this being permissible if students were not given a way of opting out without penalty. If that's happening and their anonymity is protected, it's probably fine. I still wouldn't do it, because quite obviously they have obviously not chosen to participate voluntarily, but are sort of compelled to do it. While not actionable, I think it is ethically questionable.

[professor_pat]

Bookmarking.

[sagit]

Hegemony, the mentioned project was on the analysis of student responses. It's not the content of the movie that is the problem. It's the kind of analysis that is drawn from student writings (fleeting, random, and impulsive). I read the person's article and wasn't sure how much consent he got from students to use their diaries/journals. Basically, the author observed that some students from certain cultural groups had patterns of responses that (often) indicated their moral lack. The argument itself was problematic--a poor psychological study. But more than that why would the author depend so heavily on students responses to get his own work done?

This doesn't sound at all like students doing the work for the researcher.  This is education research where the professor's goal is to understand student thinking by analyzing their writing.  It is a less invasive data collection strategy than interviewing the students so MsP is correct that this would likely get an exempt status from an IRB.  The professor still needs to submit this for IRB approval.  How do you know that he didn't?  You don't need to state that in a research article. 

It sounds like you are not familiar with social science research methodologies, Hegemony.  The researcher can't "get his own work done" without analyzing the students' writing.  That *is* the research.