What are Ethical Complexities in Nursing Research Education Comprehensive Guide for Nurse Educators and Researchers. Ethical challenges in nursing research education include protecting students’ rights as research participants, the inherent power imbalance between students and faculty/researchers, and the difficulty of teaching future nurses ethical decision-making skills to address moral dilemmas in practice and research.
A Comprehensive Guide for Nurse Educators and Researchers for Ethical Complexities in Nursing Research Education
Specific ethical issues relate to ensuring informed consent, maintaining patient and student confidentiality, protecting vulnerable populations from exploitation, and considering bias and equity in research design and execution. Faculty face the dilemma of balancing constructive feedback with student morality, maintaining academic integrity, and ensuring objectivity in grading, all of which can impact ethical considerations in an educational context.
Understanding the Ethical Landscape in Nursing Research
Ethical problems arising from research methods used in educational contexts occur passim in Burgess’s (1989a) edited collection of papers, The Ethics of Educational Research, and the book is recommended to readers for their perusal. Burgess himself considers ethical issues emerging from ethnographic research (1989b).
Interconnected Nature of Methodology and Ethics
Similar themes characterize Riddell’s paper in which she examines feminist research in two rural comprehensive schools. Her work illustrates how feminist investigations raise questions about honesty, power relations, the responsibility of the researcher to the researched, and collaboration. Corresponding topics are broached for action researchers by Kelly (1989b), who was co-director of the ‘Girls into Science and Technology’ project, a study focusing on girls’ under-involvement in science and technology.
. Reflection on the articles in Burgess (1989a) will show that the issues thrown up by the complexities of research methods in educational institutions and their ethical consequences are probably among the least anticipated, particularly among the more inexperienced researchers.
The latter need to be aware of those kinds of research which, by their nature, lead from one problem to another. Serial problems of this sort may arise in survey methods or ethnographic studies, for example, or in action research or the evaluation of developments. Indeed, the re searcher will frequently find that methodological and ethical issues are inextricably interwoven in much of the research we have designated as qualitative or interpretive.
Participant Observation in Clinical Settings
As Hitchcock and Hughes note: Doing participant observation or interviewing one’s peers raises ethical problems that are directly related to the nature of the research technique employed. The degree of openness or closure of the nature of the research and its aims is one that directly faces the teacher’s researcher. (Hitchcock and Hughes, 1989:199) They go on to pose the kinds of question that may arise in such a situation.
Key Questions for Researchers
‘Where for the researcher does formal observation end and in formal observation begin?’
‘Is it justifiable to be open with some teachers and close with others?’
‘How much can the researcher tell the pupils about a particular piece of research?’
‘When is a casual conversation part of the research data and when is it not?’
‘Is gossip legitimate data and can the researcher ethically use material that has been passed on in confidence?’
As Hitchcock and Hughes conclude, the list of questions is endless, yet they can be related to the nature of both the research technique involved and the social organization of the setting being investigated.
Building Trust and Rapport
The key to the successful resolution of such questions lies in establishing good relations. This will involve the development of a sense of rapport between researchers and their subjects that will lead to feelings of trust and confidence. Mention must be made once again in this particular context of the work of Fine and Sandstrom (1988) who discuss in some detail the ethical and practical aspects of doing field work with children.
In particular they show how the ethical implications of participant observation research differ with the age of the children. Another feature of qualitative methods in this connection has been identified by Finch who observes that: there can be acute ethical and political dilemmas about how the material produced is used, both by the researcher her/himself, and by other people. Such questions are not absent in quantitative research, but greater distancing of the researcher from the research subjects may make them less personally agonizing.
Further, in ethnographic work or depth interviewing, the researcher is very much in a position of trust in being accorded privileged access to information which is usually private or invisible. Working out how to ensure that such trust is not betrayed is no simple matter… Where qualitative research is targeted upon social policy issues, there is the special dilemma that findings could be used to worsen the situation of the target population in some way. (Finch, 1985)
Action Research
Kelly’s (1989a) paper would seem to suggest, as we have noted in previous post, that the area in qualitative research where one’s ethical antennae need to be especially sensitive is that of action research, and it is here that re searchers, be they teachers or outsiders, must show particular awareness of the traps that lie in wait. These difficulties have been nowhere better summed up than in Hopkins when he says: [The researchers’] actions are deeply embedded in an existing social organization and the failure to work within the general procedures of that organization may not only jeopardize the process of improvement but existing valuable work.
Principles of procedures for action research accordingly go beyond the usual concerns for confidentiality and respect for people who are the subjects of enquiry and define in addition, appropriate ways of working with other participants in the social organization. (Hopkins, 1985:135) presents a set of principles specially formulated for action researchers by Kemmis and McTaggart (1981) and quoted by Hopkins (1985).
We conclude by reminding readers who may become involved in action research that the problem of access is not resolved once one has been given permission to use the school or organization. The advice given by Hammersley and Atkinson with respect to ethnographic research is equally applicable to action research. As they say: [having] gained entry to a setting…by no means guarantees access to all the data available within it.
Not all parts of the setting will be equally open to observation, not everyone may be willing to talk, and even the most willing informant will not be prepared, or perhaps even able, to divulge all the information available to him or her. If the data required to develop and test the theory are to be acquired, negotiation of access is therefore likely to be a recurrent preoccupation for the ethnographer. (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1983:76) As the authors observe, different kinds of data will demand different roles, and these in turn result in varying ethical principles being applied to the various negotiating stances.
Evaluation and Assessment Ethics
After our brief excursus into the problems of ethics in relation to action research, an approach to classroom activities frequently concerned with the improvement of teacher performance and efficiency, it would seem logical to acknowledge the role and importance of ethics in teacher evaluation. The appraisal of teacher and head teacher performance is one that is going to play an increasingly important part as accountability, teacher needs, and management efficiency assume greater significance, as governments introduce pedagogic and curricular changes, and as market forces exert pressure on the educational system generally.
By thus throwing teacher appraisal into greater relief, it becomes very important that training appraisal programmers are planned and designed in such a way as to give due recognition to the ethical implications at both school and LEA levels. With this in mind, we briefly review some basic principles and concepts formulated in the USA that may sensitize all those involved in appraisal procedures to the concomitant ethical factors. Strike (1990), in his paper on the ethics of educational evaluation, offers two broad principles which may form the basis of further considerations in the field of evaluation.
These are the principles of benefit maximization and the principle of equal respect. The former, the principle of benefit maximization, holds that the best decision is the one that results in the greatest benefit for most people. It is pragmatic in the sense that it judges the rightness of our actions by their consequences or, as Strike says, the best action is the one with the best results. In British philosophical circles it is known as utilitarianism and requires us to identify the benefits we wish to maximize, to identify a suitable population for maximization, specify what is to count as maximization, and fully understand the consequences of our actions.
The second principle that of equal respect demands that we respect the equal worth of all people. This requires us to treat people as ends rather than means; to regard them as free and rational; and to accept that they are entitled to the same basic rights as others. Strike then goes on to list the following ethical principles which he regards as particularly important to teacher evaluation, and which may be seen in the light of the two broad principles outlined above:
1 Due process Evaluative procedures must ensure that judgements are reasonable: that known and accepted standards are consistently applied from case to case, that evidence is reasonable and that there are systematic and reasonable procedures for collecting and testing evidence.
2 Privacy This involves a right to control information about oneself and protects people from unwarranted interference in their affairs. In evaluation, it requires that procedures are not overtly intrusive and that such evaluation pertains only to those aspects of a teacher’s activity that is job related. It also protects the confidentiality of evaluation information.
3 Equality In the context of evaluation, this can best be understood as a prohibition against making decisions on irrelevant grounds, such as race, religion, gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation.
4 Public perspicuity this principle requires openness to the public concerning evaluative procedures, their purposes and their results. 5 Humaneness This principle requires that consideration is shown to the feelings and sensitivities of those in evaluative contexts.
6 Client benefit This principle requires that evaluative decisions are made in a way that respects the interests of students, parents and the public, in preference to those of educational institutions and their staff. This extends to treating participants as subjects rather than as ‘research fodder’.
7 Academic freedom requires that an atmosphere of intellectual openness is maintained in the classroom for both teachers and students. Evaluation should not be conducted in a way that chills this environment.
8 Respect for autonomy Teachers are entitled to reasonable discretion in, and to exercise reasonable judgements about, their work. Evaluations should not be conducted so as to unreasonably restrict discretion and judgements.
Strike has developed these principles in a more extended and systematic form in his article. Finally, we note the three principles that Strike applies to the task of conflict resolution, to re solving the differences between teachers and the institutions in which they work because of the evaluation process. He recommends that where a conflict must be resolved, remediation is to be preferred, where possible, to disciplinary action or termination; mediation is to be preferred, where possible, to more litigious forms and solutions; and that informal attempts to settle disputes should precede formal ones.
We have seen throughout this post and in this section how the codification and regulation of ethical principles is proceeding apace in the USA; and that this is occur ring at both a formal and informal level. In this next, penultimate, section we look a little closer at these matters and their implications for the UK.
Regulatory Considerations and Professional Standards
A glance at any current American textbook in the social sciences will reveal the extent to which professional researchers in the USA are governed by laws and regulations (Zechmeister and Shaughnessy, 1992). These exist at several levels: federal and state legal statutes, ethics re view committees to oversee research in universities and other institutions (these can constitute a major hurdle for those planning to undertake research), ethical codes of the professional bodies and associations as well as the personal ethics of individual researchers are all important regulatory mechanisms.
All investigators, from undergraduates pursuing a course-based research project to professional researchers striving at the frontiers of knowledge, must take care of the ethical codes and regulations governing their practice. Indeed, we have sampled some of the ethical research requirements of American investigators in this post. Failure to meet these responsibilities on the part of researchers is perceived as undermining the whole scientific process and may lead to legal and financial penalties for individuals and institutions.
If Britain has not yet gone as far as the USA down this path of regulation and litigation, it may only be a question of time. Even in the UK, however, professional societies have formulated working codes of practice which express the consensus of values within a particular group, and which help individual researchers in indicating what is desirable and what is to be avoided. Of course, this does not solve all the problems, for there are few absolutes and in consequence ethical principles may be open to a wide range of interpretations. In addition, more informal codes of ethical principles have emerged because of individual initiative.
Data Protection and Information Ethics
The establishment of comprehensive regulatory mechanisms is thus well in hand in the UK, but it is perhaps in the field of information and data—how they are stored and the uses to which they are put, for example—that educational researchers are likely to find growing interest. This category would include, for instance, statistical data, data used as the basis for evaluation, curricular records, written records, transcripts, data sheets, personal documents, research data, computer files, and audio and video recordings.
As information technology establishes itself in a center-stage position and as society becomes increasingly dependent on information economically and functionally, so we realize just how important the concept of information is to us. It is important not only for what it is, but for what it can do. Numerous writers have pointed out the connection between information and power. Harris, Pearce and Johnstone (1992), for instance, say: Information and power have a very close relationship.
Power over individuals…relies on the control of personal information. Power of professionalism involves both submission of the client to the professional’s better judgment and a network of professional and inter-professional relationships, and probably rivalries, buttressed by exclusive sharing of information. It is well to recognize that decisions about information-holding or access are, to an extent, always decisions about power. (Harris, Pearce and Johnstone, 1992)
When we reflect on the extent to which two key concepts in the world of contemporary education, namely ‘evaluation’ (or appraisal) and ‘accountability’, depend wholly on information in one form or another, that it is their very life blood, we realize just how powerful it is. Its misuse, therefore, or disclosure at the wrong time or to the wrong client or organ, can result in the most unfortunate consequences for an individual, group, or institution.
And matters are greatly exacerbated if it is the wrong information, or incomplete, or deliberately misleading. In an increasingly information-rich world, it is essential that safeguards be established to protect it from misuse or abuse. The Data Protection Act (1984) was designed to achieve such an end. This covered the principles of data protection, the responsibilities of data users, and the rights of data subjects, and its broad aims are embodied in eight principles.
However, data held for ‘historical and research’ purposes are exempted from the principle which gives individuals the right of access to personal data about themselves, provided the data are not made available in a form which identifies individuals. Research data also have partial ex emption from two further principles, with the effect that such data may be held indefinitely and the use of the data for research purposes need not be disclosed at the time of data collection.
Of the two most important principles which do concern research data, one states that personal data (i.e., data that uniquely identifies the person supplying it) shall be held only for specified and lawful purposes. The second principle states that appropriate security measures shall be taken against unauthorized access to, or alteration, disclosure, or destruction of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of personal data. For a study of the effects of the Data Protection Act on the work of the Centre for Educational Sociology, see Raffe, Bundell and Bibby (1989).
Developing Your Ethical Framework
To this end, we have drawn on key concepts and ideas from deliberations and investigations in the educational, psychological, social psychological and sociological domains in order to elucidate some of the more important dilemmas and issues that are an inevitable part of social research. In doing this we are well aware that it is not possible to identify all potential ethical questions or adjudicate on what correct researcher behavior is.
On the other hand, perhaps some of the things we have said will seem irrelevant to readers who are unlikely to be called upon to submit subjects to painful electric shocks, provoke aggression, embarrass them, have them tell lies, or eat grasshoppers, as Aronson and Carlsmith (1969) put it. Nevertheless, it is hoped that these few pages will have induced in readers a certain disposition that will enable them to approach their own more temperate projects with a greater awareness and fuller understanding of the ethical dilemmas and moral issues lurking in the interstices of the research process.
However in experienced in these matters researchers are, they will bring to the world of social research a sense of rightness5 on which they can construct a set of rational principles appropriate to their own circumstances and based on personal, professional, and societal values (we stress the word ‘rational’ since reason is a prime ingredient of ethical thinking and it is the combination of reason and a sense of rightness that researchers must keep faith with if they are to bring a rich ethical quality to their work).
Six-fold Advantage of Personal Ethical Code
Although no code of practice can anticipate or resolve all problems, there is a six-fold advantage in fashioning a personal code of ethical practice.
First, such a code establishes one as a member of the wider scientific community having a shared interest in its values and concerns.
Second, a code of ethical practice makes re searchers aware of their obligations to their subjects and also to those problem areas where there is a general consensus about what is acceptable and what is not. In this sense it has a clarificatory value.
Third, when one’s professional behaviour is guided by a principled code of ethics, then it is possible to consider that there may be alternative ways of doing the same thing, ways that are more ethical or less unethical should one be confronted by a moral challenge.
Fourth, a balanced code can be an important organizing factor in researchers’ perceptions of the research situation, and as such may assist them in their need to anticipate and prepare.
Fifth, a code of practice validated by their own sense of right ness will help researchers to develop an intuitive sensitivity that will be particularly helpful to them in dealing with the unknown and the unexpected, especially where the more fluidic methods such as ethnography and participant observation are concerned.
And sixth, a code of practice will bring discipline to researchers’ awareness. Indeed, it should be their aim to strike a balance between discipline and awareness. Discipline without awareness may result in largely mechanical behavior; whereas aware ness without discipline can produce inappropriate responses.
Finally, we live in a relative universe and it has been said that relativity seeks adjustment; that adjustment is art; and that the art of life lies in a constant readjustment to one’s surroundings (Okakura, 1991). What better precept for the art of the ethical researcher?
Read More:
https://nurseseducator.com/didactic-and-dialectic-teaching-rationale-for-team-based-learning/
https://nurseseducator.com/high-fidelity-simulation-use-in-nursing-education/
First NCLEX Exam Center In Pakistan From Lahore (Mall of Lahore) to the Global Nursing
Categories of Journals: W, X, Y and Z Category Journal In Nursing Education
AI in Healthcare Content Creation: A Double-Edged Sword and Scary
Social Links:
https://www.facebook.com/nurseseducator/
https://www.instagram.com/nurseseducator/
https://www.pinterest.com/NursesEducator/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/nurseseducator/
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Afza-Lal-Din
https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=F0XY9vQAAAAJ