Right! UNC is obviously embarrassed by the publicity of the fact that (like most major American universities) it admits (hires would be a better term) 'students' whose only qualification is their athletic ability. I'm sure that most of us have experienced this first hand. I know I have, even though Minnesota State, Mankato is Division I only in hockey (not in academics ;-).
On Jan 20, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Christopher Green wrote: > People! It seems pretty obvious that the issue here isn't research ethics at > all. The issue is that, it would appear that an embarrassed university > administration has decided to use its IRB to take revenge on a professor who > has done important research that happens to reflect poorly on the school. If > you're looking for an ethical issue THAT's the one to contemplate -- not > minutia about how large a sample needs to be before a participant is > effectively shielded from identification if an anecdote told about his > performance on the research task. > > Think I am jumping to conclusions? Consider: if the researcher had gone on > to CNN (on a VERY slow news day) to explain that some of her subjects were > not as good at recalling words that start with the letter "b" as they were > words that start with the letter "q", how likely do you think it is that > there would have been an abrupt IRB reversal? Burden of proof shifted. > > Chris > --- > Christopher D. Green > Department of Psychology > York University > Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 > Canada > > chri...@yorku.ca > http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ > ========================= > > On 2014-01-20, at 11:35 AM, MiguelRoig wrote: > >> Jim, I think your analogy is not quite on target. We are not talking about >> disclosure to other students, it is disclosure to CNN, which can potentially >> distribute that information worldwide! Also, and sad to say, getting a 20% >> on a test may not be that unique; being in college and not being able to >> read multisyllabic words is kind of unique ... or at least I hope so. >> >> Miguel >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jim Clark" <j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca> >> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" >> <tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:27:02 AM >> Subject: RE: [tips] For your friends who question tenure... >> >> Hi >> >> The only way these statements could allow identification of individuals out >> of the 183 students she worked with would be if the students themselves told >> other people. But that opens a can of worms ... if some student tells >> others that he got 20% on a test, is my posting the grades without naming >> the student a violation of privacy? >> >> The episode has similarities to Elizabeth Loftus's experiences with an IRB >> and perhaps again indicates the need to markedly curtail their activities >> with respect to social science research, as called for I understand in the >> National Research Council's recent report. >> >> http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18614 >> >> Take care >> Jim >> >> >> Jim Clark >> Professor & Chair of Psychology >> 204-786-9757 >> 4L41A >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: MiguelRoig [mailto:miguelr...@comcast.net] >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 8:20 AM >> To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) >> Subject: Re: [tips] For your friends who question tenure... >> >> As a member of my institution's IRB, I reacted to the following segment: >> "Willingham also shared anecdotes about students she’d worked with during >> her career, such as one who was illiterate, and one who couldn’t read >> multisyllabic words. Another student asked if Willingham could "teach him to >> read well enough so he could read about himself in the news,". It seems to >> me that it might, indeed, be possible to identify those individual students >> based on the statements Willingham made. If so, that is a problem from an >> IRB perspective because broadcasting such details about the students could >> conceivably result in social harm for them. That aside, in addition to the >> issue of tenure, this case also illustrates the need to be extremely careful >> with all aspects of the research process when such research has the >> potential of being controversial and of generating public interest. >> >> Miguel >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Christopher Green" <chri...@yorku.ca> >> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" >> <tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 8:44:25 AM >> Subject: [tips] For your friends who question tenure... >> >> For those of you (probably not many on this list) who might have thought >> that tenure is unnecessary in this "modern" era to protect the integrity of >> research from the political motivations of a vindictive administration. >> >> UNC IRB suddenly reverses its decision AFTER THE FACT on whether research >> that shows many of its athletes to be functionally illiterate requires >> oversight. >> >> http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/20/u-north-carolina-shuts-down-whistle-blower-athletes >> >> Sheesh! >> Chris Paul Brandon Emeritus Professor of Psychology Minnesota State University, Mankato pkbra...@hickorytech.net --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=32929 or send a blank email to leave-32929-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
