George,
Your solution would work out great if all faculty could be regarded as totally ethical and knowledgeable about all potential shortcomings of their own ethical judgement when it comes to research with human subjects. But if this were true, we wouldn't need IRBs in the first place. The problem arises when the faculty member causes or allows students to do projects that should be IRB reviewed, but aren't, because in the faculty member's judgement, the projects are safe, or because they fall within the faculty member's academic freedom.
Regardless of whether the faculty member assumes legal liability for the unethical research of his/her students, I for one, as a citizen of the human subject science community, am not willing to let the research go on. I don't think the veil of academic freedom should allow one to hide from ethical responsibility; not that it often does, but it could.
I have had direct dealings with a faculty member who wanted his/her students to do research, under the guise of academic freedom, that would've been deemed by an IRB, and certainly me, to be unethical. It raised quite a hoopla on the campus. Potentially worse than that is when classroom based research falls into the laps of other disciplines; such as when an English professor assigns a behavior modification project to her/his class. Is the English professor required to have her/his assigned human-subjects project reviewed by the IRB? I should hope so, but I doubt the English professor would necessarily know that it should.
No doubt the academic freedom vs. IRB review issue is a messy one, but I think it's one we need to start dealing with.
wedj
Wallace,
I fully understand and appreciate your concerns. However, I do
not believe that the primary responsibility of IRB's are to function
as "academic police". In many respects, I believe that is
the responsibility of a department chair. At least, I take it to be
one of my responsibilities as a chair. At a chair workshop many years
ago on legal liabilities of chairs, I was told that department chairs
are liable for what they know as well as what they should have known
about illegal/unethical behavior of faculty. So, I believe that
department chairs have a responsibility to be gatekeepers in their
respective departments and to be vigilant when it comes to their
curriculum, syllabi, classroom assignments, etc. Unethical
behavior of all sorts can certainly occur in the classroom or lab or
faculty office. I for one would vehemently resist IRB review of all
course syllabi as well as research protocols to ensure that my
colleagues are as ethical as I am. Lines must be drawn somewhere. I
assume my colleagues are ethical until or unless I have information to
the contrary. However, I do not assume that they are knowledgeable
with respect to ethical guidelines regarding the use of human
participants in research (unless they are psychology colleagues, in
which case, they better be). That is why I am available, as are other
IRB board members, to consult with faculty that may wish to stray
"out of their areas of expertise". I expect their respective
department chairs to send that message since it has been sent to them.
Take care.
George
--
George D. Goedel
Professor & Chairperson
Department of Psychology
Northern Kentucky University
Highland Hts., KY 41099-2000
(859) 572-5574
fax (859) 572-6085
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---George D. Goedel
Professor & Chairperson
Department of Psychology
Northern Kentucky University
Highland Hts., KY 41099-2000
(859) 572-5574
fax (859) 572-6085
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
