|
CeAL Case Studies in Active Learning 1. Undergraduates as participants: the development of participation pools 2. Contact details Name and address: 3. Context
4. Brief Description On undergraduate psychology courses in the UK, Australia North America it is common for 1st and 2nd year students to participate in research being conducted by final year students (for their dissertation projects), postgraduates or staff members. Rewards for participation include course credits or the ability to use participants from the ‘participation scheme’ when they themselves are in their final year. The scheme enables students to experience the dual perspective of researcher and participant whilst participating in cutting edge research. The system has the potential for transferability to other disciplines which undertake research on human subjects.
At universities across the UK, Australia and North America it is common for psychology departments to develop ‘participant pools’ of undergraduate students to participate in final year, postgraduate and staff research. A recent report suggests that as many as 75% of Psychology Departments in the USA and Canada have such schemes, drawing heavily from undergraduate participants (Foot & Sanford, 2004). Institutional variations in such schemes are wide ranging; students may be required to participate in research to achieve course credits, to gain access to the participation pool in the future, or the scheme may be purely altruistic, with participants volunteering through a genuine desire to aid psychologists in their research. The motivations for such schemes are clear, the development of a large pool of free, available participants reduces the research overheads of a department and can fuel the research output of staff, particularly those without large grants to support their research. In addition the participation scheme can also solve the problem of sourcing adequate numbers of participants for final year dissertation projects, therefore maintaining final year students’ ability to carry out research of their own. For the students, the opportunity to participate in and witness, cutting edge research first hand is believed to give them a better understanding of the process of conducting research. It also provides students with an otherwise rare opportunity to talk one-on-one with staff and postgraduates about their research and careers. The creation of participation pools is common on Psychology courses, however the system may also be transferable to other courses. The success of transferring the scheme to other subject areas would be dependent on an adequate ratio of undergraduate students to research projects requiring undergraduate participants. Programs on which final year students are required to complete a piece of research on human subjects may offer some of the best opportunities for this type of project to flourish (particularly as ethical protocols typically limit final year students from using groups of participants other than their undergraduate peers). Examples of such courses may include Behavioural Economics, Dentistry, Physiology, Medicine, Neuroscience, Nursing and Sports Science to name just a few. In Psychology, the large number of departmental research projects requiring student participants allows a scheme in which student participation is compulsory, i.e. a required number of hours must be spent in participation to obtain the required course credits. In some other areas this may not be possible but this should not preclude the development of a participation pool. As previously stated, participant pools can work on an entirely altruistic basis in which students who are particularly interested in research participate without any reward. Such a scheme would be ideal for departments with limited numbers of participation opportunities. Therefore even in departments with small numbers of research active staff or small numbers of projects suitable for undergraduate participation participant pools should still be developed. As previously stated there is significant cross-institution variation in the way participation pools are operated. Obviously it would be unethical for participation in research to be a compulsory aspect of a course and therefore an alternative must be presented for students who do not wish to participate. Ideally alternatives to participation should have similar learning outcomes to participation itself i.e. an increased understanding of research methods and the research process. Typically students may be asked to write a critical appraisal of method of enquiry, or to comment critically on a study of their choice. A further alternative is for students unwilling to engage with the participation scheme, or for departments in which the research is unsuitable for the participant pool is for students to work as Research Assistants for members of staff either during term time or over the summer vacation period. Students working as RAs offer an excellent opportunity for staff-student collaboration and in some cases will lead to publications for the students involved. Research placements may also be excellent ways of rewarding and recognising outstanding students by giving them experience which may benefit applications for post-graduate study in the future. Funding for such schemes is widely available from Research Councils (for example the BBSRC, ESRC and EPS to name just a few) however in departments with limited funds students may find themselves working on a voluntary basis which may lead some to suggest that students are being “exploited” by working as general dogs-bodies for staff. Whilst this is a very real criticism of student RA schemes, making sure that the student has clear learning objectives rather than just research targets will go some way to ensuring that the placement is a learning experience as well as just work experience. Whether participating in a large number of projects to gain credits, working as an RA for a member of staff or reviewing methodologies students should be encouraged to discuss with their experimenter/supervisor the aims, method, analysis and background to the studies in which they are involved to enable them place their experience within a framework. Ideally students should also be encouraged to reflect on how their knowledge has developed as a result of participation. Throughout the development and maintenance of participation schemes it should be emphasised that the primary aim is for staff to engage with students to enhance their learning experience, rather than to merely enhance staff members’ ability to publish. This issue is particularly pertinent when considering issues of inclusivity. Many students may find themselves excluded from participation in many experiments due to factors beyond their control, for example, students with mobility difficulties or pre-existing medical conditions may find that they are have difficulties in finding suitable projects in which to participate. In psychological studies it is also typical for students whose first language is not English to be excluded from participating in many studies. The exclusion of participants on the grounds that their data may not be suitable for peer reviewed publication implies that the institution has shifted the primary use of the scheme from a tool to enhance student learning to a tool to enhance staff data collection and publication, and this should be addressed accordingly. Institutional policy should emphasise that whilst it may not always be suitable for individual participants’ data to be submitted for analysis and future publication, there is little reason why such students cannot participate in experiments solely for the purpose of learning. Similarly institutions should ensure that all testing facilities are accessible to students with disabilities and that researchers are able to accommodate the needs of such students ensuring that all participants feel valued and have equal opportunities to participate in the learning experience. The participant pool provides undergraduate students with the opportunity to engage to research in ‘doing research mode.’ 1st and 2nd year students gain valuable experience of what it is like to be a participant, as well as getting the opportunity to discuss on a one-to-one basis with staff the methodology of their research. The pool also enables final year students to conduct a research project of their own by providing the necessary numbers of participants. Throughout an undergraduate academic career, the participation pool provides students with the dual perspective of being ‘researcher’ and ‘participant’, arguably an understanding and experience of both of these roles is crucial for a good understanding of research design. Through participating in a wide range of research projects students become aware of a larger range of methodologies than it would be possible to cover in your average undergraduate module. If participating in staff research, the students will also gain experience of cutting edge research, rather than simple replications of existing experiments. 6. Hot tips and things to look out for: Ethics: This type of system provides numerous ethical dilemmas, many of which are discussed in a recent article by Foot and Sanford (2004) published in The Psychologist. The main issue regards the exploitation of students to enable staff to conduct research. If participation for credits is a core element of an undergraduate course there must be some alternative for students who chose not to participate. All students must maintain the right to withdraw from the system without detriment to themselves, in line with APA/BPS/NHS ethical guidelines. Non-participators can obtain the credits associated with participation though the completion of written work, such as essays or methodological reviews. The alternative to participation should take as long as participation itself and ideally should provide similar learning outcomes for the student i.e. a greater understanding of the process of research design. Advertised research studies should also have been subject to the local ethical application procedures and all projects should adhere to BPS, APA or NHS ethical guidelines. In how many research projects are students likely to be able to participate? It is important to first assess the amount of research being conducted in your department. The availability of studies for students to participate in will determine the number of experiments or amount of time participants are required to spend doing research to achieve their reward. How will you record student participation? Experience suggests that some students may attempt to fraudulently claim to have participated in studies. One way to combat this is for experimenters and students to keep a paper record of who has participated in what. This information can then be fed into a central database which is maintained by a staff member. Whilst this is effective it is inefficient and often time confusing. An alternative method is to have an online database into which experimenters can input information relating to student participation and students can check the number of credits they have been awarded. This removes the need for a singular member of staff to be responsible for the database therefore reducing the long-term costs of the initiative. What to do about no shows? On occasions students or experimenters will not attend arranged experiments, preventing the research from being conducted. Depending on the circumstances, students may be penalised for non-attendance, for example they may be fined one credit, alternately you may employ a ‘three strikes and you’re out rule’ in which three non-attendances result in expulsion from the scheme. If the scheme forms part of mandatory credit module, alternate task may be set, for example, an essay on ethics. 7. Does it work? Relatively little research has examined the impact of participant pools on undergraduate learning with Kimmel (1996), Nimmer and Handelsman (1992), and Siber and Saks (1989) seemingly forming an entire literature. These studies do, however, indicate that students do see the educational benefit of participation schemes. Further examination of student perspectives on participation schemes is currently being undertaken at Liverpool John Moores University. 8. What problems / issues have arisen? See section 6 9. Details of support material / course work / assessment methods None 10. What leadership issues have arisen? There is some debate as to whether participant schemes, such as described above genuinely improve 1st and 2nd year students understanding of research methods. As previously stated, Kimmel (1996) indicates that students themselves see educational benefit to participation schemes and the direct experience of participating in research. Some staff may however, perceive the scheme as only benefiting research active staff, by providing them with free participants. This is an undeniable benefit of the scheme, however it is also an aspect of the scheme which will benefit the students themselves; in the future they too will have participants on which to conduct research, in addition, enabling staff to stay research active enables links between teaching and research to be established and maintained leading to a higher quality teaching environment. There are some concern over the ethics of effectively coercing students into participating in research for course benefit rather than completing an alternate task, such as an essay, which is often perceived to be more time consuming and less interesting than participation. One possible solution to this problem may come from the phrasing of the options. From my experience, it is typical for the participation scheme to be presented to students as the ‘norm’, the option that everyone picks and the option that you should choose. If instead the participation scheme and the alternative were presented as genuinely equal alternatives, with the department and staff favouring neither choice more than the other, students may perceive less pressure from the department to choose the participation scheme to please staff. Some members of staff may be reluctant to use the scheme due to concerns over the motivation of the students as participants believing that this may impact on the findings of their research. In addition there are also some concerns, particularly in psychology, regarding the near exclusive use of undergraduate students as participants in research and the implications that this may have for the field as a whole (see Sear, 1986 for a discussion). Whilst concerns such as these are valid, institutions must ensure that the requirement of staff to produce publishable data does not overshadow the learning opportunities of the student body. 11. Are there significant resource issues / implications? Monitoring and recording student participation will potentially require additional resources. This may be though the development of an on-line database in which participation can be recorded and experiments advertised. Alternately it may be the casual employment of an administrator (for example a postgraduate student) to manually input and monitor student participation. 12. Relevant references and Web Foot, H., & Sanford, A. (2004) The use and abuse of student participants, The Psychologist, 17, 256-259. http://www.thepsychologist.org.uk/archive/archive_home.cfm?volumeID=17&editionID=106&ArticleID=694 Simply googling “participation scheme” will provide links to numerous participation schemes operating at universities across the world.
15/04/2009
For more information on the Centre for Active Learning contact: |
In this Section... Engaging students in applied research through a community sports development consultancy project Engaging students in environmental health research and outreach: The Science of a Healthy Home Student Training in Active Research (STAR) Undergraduate Research in the Department of Economics at Allegheny College, Pennsylvania, USA Core 2.0 - Linking Student Learning with the Discovery of Knowledge Inter-Disciplinary Inquiry-Based Learning (IDIBL) Focusing on Action Research in the Workplace Undergraduates as participants: the development of participation pools Research for beginners: assessment design to foster research skills ‘The Plymouth Student Scientist’: an undergraduate e-journal Inquiry based undergraduate programme at the University of Utrecht |
Edit | Log In | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | © UoG 2004-10