Abstract
One of the more challenging areas of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) research can be navigating the components of human subjects research protections implemented by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). The authors of this article, a faculty developer and a current and former research compliance coordinator, discuss the history of IRB in relation to SoTL research and explicate some of the foundational components of IRB protocols for SoTL projects. In particular, the authors explore what constitutes “research” for SoTL projects, explain the different IRB types of review, and offer some sample SoTL projects with respect to their IRB implications.
Highlights
One of the more challenging areas of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) research can be navigating the components of human subjects research protections established by the Office of Human Research Protections and implemented by the Institutional Review Board (IRB)
As we explored the SoTL literature, we found only one article (Pritchard, 2001) that included guidelines aimed at SoTL researchers that both discussed the components of IRB review while providing examples of how this might apply in a SoTL context
As a faculty developer and a current and former research compliance coordinator who often partner with one another to help faculty navigate the relationship between SoTL and the requirements necessary for conducting human subject research, we have found that a shared definition between our offices has been a helpful component of this work
Summary
One of the more challenging areas of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) research can be navigating the components of human subjects research protections established by the Office of Human Research Protections and implemented by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). The literature has shown that interacting with the IRB can be a challenge for faculty who are unfamiliar with human subjects research protections and/or the scholarship of teaching and learning (see, for example, Lopus, Grimes, Becker, & Pearson, 2007; Wright, Finelli, Meizlish, & Bergom, 2011). As we explored the SoTL literature, we found only one article (Pritchard, 2001) that included guidelines aimed at SoTL researchers that both discussed the components of IRB review while providing examples of how this might apply in a SoTL context. We hope that this reflective piece will offer some clarification for faculty members, those who are new to SoTL research or who are first-time IRB applicants
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
