Informed Consent in Educational Research Settings: Definitions, Requirements, and Exemptions - Coursework Example

Running Head: INFORMED CONSENT Informed Consent in Educational Research Settings: Definitions, Requirements and Exemptions Introduction Globally, there has been a collective move to increase the effectivity and efficiency of educational programs. This has been motivated not only by the need to improve curricula but as an effort to increase social productivity and address key public issues such as marginalization, juvenile delinquency and victimization. In line with this, there is a realization that developing sensitive and accurate research among various stakeholders of the educational system is the critical. To be able to achieve this, there is a need to increase not only research competencies but also participation and confidence of the public in such efforts. One of the standards to be followed in research is the gaining consent of participants. General Purpose Informed consent commonly refers to the condition by which an individual signifies that he has been disclosed facts, consequences and implication of an event, condition or interaction he is subject to or participating in. According to Berg and associates (2001), it is a mechanism to protect not full disclosure has been provided to the individual giving consent but also protects parties for future claims of damages due to participation or involvement in an undertaking or procedure. As a general rule, consent is required for any situation wherein there is an individual’s exercise of choice, prospect or prognosis, state of well-being or status may be affected. However, for consent to be considered valid there is an assumption that the individual is in the right state of mind to give such consent. This refers to the disclosure of relevant facts and circumstances as well as the comprehension of such conditions, facts and implications that may be relevant based on existing scenarios or that which may be reasonably inferred. The state and capacity of mind is also a critical element of informed consent. Any impairment to reasoning or judgment in turn impairs the validity of the consent given: mental retardation, physical and psychological conditions or force majeure are often used to contest consent. In educational research, informed consent is often elicited indirectly, such as in the case of minors, from parents, care givers or legal guardians. Commonly, consent is requested for disclosure for testing and monitoring, recording, use and disclosure of information and the execution of interventions as may be needed by students or participants. Special requirements of consent have also become required by educational institutions in situations where procedures and policies may be considered invasive or may be in conflict with religious or cultural traditions or practices. Requirement of Consent One of first incidence where consent may be elicited by educational institutions is during applications for admission or enrollment to the institution. It is common practice that school application forms are accompanied with statement of consents to attest waivers of privacy. Furthermore, compliance with such request is prescribed as a requirement for a student to be considered for acceptance. In recent years, the practice has been also utilized to deter fraud, to support security for educational institutions and as a means to profile prospective students. The creation of student profiles is common to all educational institutions. Aside from being the foundation of students’ subsequent records, they also provide insights regarding the prevailing status of the institution. Such research can be utilized as an assessment tool for services and programs that may be needed or suggest areas of development and competency. Outside curricula or institutional development, it can also provide insights on the prevailing public opinion or status of the institution. Though such studies are not traditionally a concern of educational research, there has been greater focus on such studies in recognition of educational institutions as platforms for social development and intervention. Furthermore, in cross-referencing information that has been disclosed with other institutions, either for the purpose of administration or research also allows for educational institutions to have a more comprehensive educational background of students. It is critical that consent be given for this purpose because accessing such information may entail the circumvention of information security and disclosure protocols not only for schools but also legal statutes, particularly those that aim to guarantee confidentiality of juveniles or victims of crime. Furthermore, since the individual to provide the informed consent is not yet part of the requesting institution, there may be limitation to the protection that the latter can or would provide the former. At the same time, the consent also protects institutions from possible indictment or litigation. The rise in criminal and civil cases due to alleged abuse of consent has become a critical consideration for researchers especially those that involve educational settings has prompted many research initiatives to actively seek legal insurance or prepare legal remedies (Wiles et al, 2005). Overall, Atkinson (2006) believes that though such measures do not just provide protection for involved parties but ensures that research efforts and utilization of information disclosed is used properly and considers the public and individual interests equitably. Exemptions for Consent In general, waivers of consent are not admissible. However, in cases where public interest and safety may be compromised or there is interest for the greater public good, such waivers age honored. Similarly, if the exemptions or lack of informed consent has the potential to improve the well-being or be to the benefit of the individual who has denied consent, there is perceived to be an ethical ground for the exemption (Berg et al, 2001). However, even in such cases where there is exemption to consent, “the power to determine the ways in which potential participants are informed about a study and the process of consent, which may influence potential participants’ willingness to participate” is limited to the extent that they are not to influence the decision of exemption. Common exemptions of informed in education research include cases where the research conducted is of common practice, part of institutional or curriculum strategies or part of developmental initiatives improving methodologies, practices and research (Indiana University School of Education, 2009). Exemption are also extended to educational or aptitude testing, surveys or assessments particularly if such testing reveals the need for intervention with the limitation that such disclosure will not affect the said individual’s right to privacy or damage his personal or social status (Holmes-Rovner et al, 2002). This right is similar to that practiced by federal or state agencies that monitor social services, public indexes or any other programs that aim to improve public well-being. Lastly, exemptions for informed consent exemption are also given in cases where information that is to be taken is simply an update of previous information collected, or is part of a public census or is an element of public information databases. Special Exemptions for Juveniles The status of children as juveniles presents a challenge when dealing with informed consent in educational research. As the direct subjects of educational research efforts whose consent by law is generally managed by their parents, guardians or caregivers, the level of disclosure that they themselves actually about the study being conducted sometimes becomes secondary. However, this does not mean that juveniles’ right of informed consent is totally taken out of their control, or that parent, guardians and caregivers have absolute control over, or that any sign of informed consent they provide is automatically null and void. Cotter and associates (2009) point out that in consideration of developing social standards, there are times when children’s consent may be provided directly or used to contest consent that may have elicited through their parents, guardians or caregivers. These cases include times wherein the latter’s consent may be proven to be not in the interest of the child or if the child actually is considered to have sufficient information and capacity to judge such information to give such consent. Special circumstances or considerations are required in consent issues with children, particularly if the “informed consent” considered is given by a child. As the British Educational Research Association points out, juvenile to a very high degree, “make their decision, at least partly, in light of those relationships. And they may feel that their hand is forced to agree or disagree by someone who is in an institutional position above them, or by their peer group, or by consideration for people for whom they feel a responsibility” (2009, para 5). The primary motivation is to protect the interest of the child and to ensure that he is not placed in situations where his physical, emotional or psychological well-being may be compromised. However, any variance to the requirements of consent, particularly if they involve children, are subject to scrutiny and contestable when there is evidence that the absence of such consent impairs the welfare of the child at the time the research is conducted or consequently as a result of such research (Berg et al, 2001). Conclusion As the tem itself suggests, proper disclosure of the purposes of the research and its implications and the capacity to properly judge such information to ensure the safety and well-being of the individual giving the consent is the core concern. In the case of educational research, such considerations are even more highlighted because they usually deal with clients or subjects who are most vulnerable. Eliciting informed consent is not just a means to satisfy legal or civil requirements but is critical in building long-term collaboration with research populations. It is an assurance that research practices and methodologies fulfill their purpose of improving knowledge, policies and ultimately, society as a whole. References Atkinson, J. (2006) Private and Public Protection: Civil Mental Health Legislation, Edinburgh, Dunedin Academic Press. Berg, Jessica W., Appelbaum, Paul S., Parker, Lisa S. and Lidz, Charles W. (2001). Informed Consent: Legal Theory and Clinical Practice. London: Oxford University Press. British Educational Research Association (2009). Ethics and Educational Research: Fully informed, free consent?. Retrieved on July 22, 2009 from http://www.bera.ac.uk/ethics-and-educational-research/fully-informed-free-consent/ Cotter, L. Emily, Chevrier, Jonathan, El-Nachef, Wael Noor, Radhakrishna, Rohan, Rahangdale, Lisa, Weiser, Sheri D. and Iacopino Vincent (2009). Health and Human Rights Education in U.S. Schools of Medicine and Public Health: Current Status and Future Challenges. PLoS ONE. 2009; 4(3): e4916 Holmes-Rovner M, Wills CE., Improving informed consent: insights from behavioral decision research, Med Care. 2002 Sep;40 (9 Suppl):V30-8. Indiana University School of Education (2009). Informed Consent Checklist. Retrieved on July 22, 2009 from http://www.indiana.edu/~edrsch/checklist.html Simandiraki, A. (2006). International Education and Cultural Heritage: Alliance or Antagonism?. Journal Journal of Research in International Education, April, 5(1): 35-56. Wiles, Rose, Heath, Sue, Crow, Graham and Charles, Vikki (2005). Informed Consent in Social Research: A Literature Review. NCRM Methods Review Papers. NCRM/001. Swindon: Economic and Social Research Council - National Centre for Research Methods Read More