Ethical Standards of the American Educational Research Association - Essay Example

 Ethical research standards are one of the moral foundations that the scientific community uses to assure that its practices are credible, competent, and treats the subjects with respect and dignity. Educational research holds a special importance as it involves children, vulnerable populations, and has the potential for generating irreversible results. It is therefore imperative that educational researchers adhere to a strict set of ethical guidelines that assures that the research is scientifically sound, as well as making a positive contribution to the field of educational research. The American Educational Research Association (AREA) publishes a comprehensive set of ethical standards used to guide the work of educational researchers. This paper will examine three of the most pressing and relevant ethical issues that face educational researchers. One of the most important issues of research ethics is research honesty. According to AREA's standards, "Educational researchers must not fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent authorship, evidence, data, findings, or conclusions" (AREA, 2005). While this may seem an obvious transgression of research ethics, researchers may be tempted to compromise results in the face of scarce resources. Researchers may be tempted to 'borrow' data without giving proper credit, or falsify data that they intuitively believe to be true, without having accomplished the research. In addition, political or social agendas may drive the research and results could be skewed to reflect the particular point of view of the researcher. All of these cases place the research in question and bring harm to a vulnerable population of students. Another key component of ethical educational research is the expectation of anonymity and privacy. AREA's ethical code states, "Informants and participants have a right to remain anonymous. This right should be respected when no clear understanding to the contrary has been reached" (AREA, 2005). In other words, all participants have the expectation of privacy and anonymity. The subjects do not have to request that their data or test scores remain private, the ethical standards assure it. If the researcher wishes to make the information public, they must seek explicit permission from the participant. To protect the individual from harm, and the researcher from liability, the issue of informed consent must be completely resolved. The AREA ethical standards require that "Participants, or their guardians, in a research study have the right to be informed about the likely risks involved in the research and of potential consequences for participants, and to give their informed consent before participating in research" (AREA, 2005). Informed consent extends to the purpose of the research, as well as the intended use of its outcomes. Informed consent implies non-deceptive practices. However, in cases where the science demands deception, it may be used with the understanding that it will need to be eventually disclosed and the research cleared by an ethical review board. Honesty, anonymity, and informed consent are ethical standards that are applicable to all areas of research, but take on special importance when the subjects may be children and students. Adherence to these guidelines helps to assure that all the participants understand the risks, are personally protected, and that the research has scientific credibility. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation Program Evaluation Standards Educational program evaluation is a critical component in the implementation and execution of an educational curricula. Knowing what works, what doesn't work, and what can be done to improve a program is critical to the ongoing progress necessary for the advancement of education research and study. The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation was created in 1974 to take on the task of establishing a set of standards for program evaluation (Sanders, n.d.). One of their initial findings was that "program evaluation is a lot bigger than just the use of tests." (Sanders, n.d.). In line with this philosophy, the Joint Committee has published a comprehensive set of guidelines for educational program evaluation. This paper will examine three of the main points of the Joint Committee's standards for educational program evaluation. Credibility and competence of the evaluators is a vital component of credible program evaluation. According to Sanders (1994), "Evaluators should establish their credibility with the client and other users at the outset of the evaluation. If the confidence and trust of these audiences cannot be secured, the evaluators should seriously consider not proceeding" (p. 31). As part of this, the evaluators must be open to review and be completely open about their qualifications. A common mistakes made in this area is biasing the qualifications based on a stakeholder agenda, or allowing the process to be turned over to inexperienced student evaluators (Sanders, 1994, p. 32). In today's world of scarce educational resources the issues of cost effectiveness and frugality have reached new importance. The evaluation standards call for a complete fiscal openness to assure cost effectiveness. According to Sanders (1994), the evaluators should, "develop a budget in which all costs, including dollar amounts, time, and in-kind support are listed and, where necessary, explained" (p. 78). In addition, the evaluators should measure cost against benefits, and anticipate any disruptions or irregularities that may alter the budget significantly (Sanders, 1994, p. 78). Failure to adhere to these standards can result in cost overruns, or limitations on the use of more cost effective evaluation procedures. A conflict of interest can destroy an evaluation's credibility, even when it is just the appearance on impropriety. The Joint Committee standards state, "Conflict of interest should be dealt with openly and honestly so that it does not compromise the evaluation processes and results" (Sanders, 1994, p. 115). Personal friendships, professional associations, and financial interests can all create the appearance of a conflict of interest. While the evaluator may have the best of intentions, there is the possibility that these relationships may influence the outcome. Honest disclosure may clear the air, or it may require that the evaluators step aside and dismiss themselves from participation to maintain the evaluation's integrity. Evaluating an educational program requires competence, honesty, and no outside factors that may influence the results. In almost all questionable cases, full disclosure and openness can prevent an evaluation from becoming tainted and discredited. Evaluators need to remain cognizant of the evaluation's benefits, its costs, and the myriad issues that need to be resolved to maintain credibility and program integrity. References American Educational Research Association (AREA). (2005). About AREA. American Educational Research Association. Retrieved from http://www.aera.net/aboutaera/?id=222. Sanders, J. R. General background on the joint committee on standards for educational evaluation. . Sanders, J. R. (1994). The program evaluation standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Read More