I don't think it appropriate for IRBs to evaluate research design except in cases where risk or clear ethical issues might lead to ways of lessening such problems. I served on the IRB before they became politicized and involved such silliness. Now, of course, clearly there are research studies in education (fill in your favorite problem area here) that are poorly controlled and must involve a "waste of time" for subjects so we should review such studies for design flaws? How about qualitative studies? What are the popular designs and methods peculiar to each discipline? What's happened is that these groups must have political representation on IRBs to protect their turf and argue that THEIR studies are not wastes of time. We usually had a lawyer, an outside community person, and student representation on the IRB. These folks could contribute well, but not in the area of research design. Perhaps, we should just have the IRB submit all proposals to journal editors or the national committee for Homeland Protection of Correct Research? Silly, silly, but sadly the current state of affairs. Gary
Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D. Professor, Psychology Saginaw Valley State University University Center, MI 48710 989-964-4491 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
