Research Ethics, Ethics Review, and the Teaching–Learning–Research Nexus: A Case Study of Ethical Conduct in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Abstract

This doctoral study explores how students, as participants in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) research, perceive ethical conduct. The study underscores the importance of engaging with participant communities to inform ethical research. For SoTL, participants' perspectives are valuable for three main reasons. Firstly, seeking their views acknowledges them as co-creators of SoTL knowledge, reflecting a distinction between research being with participants rather than on research subjects. Secondly, their input can provide valuable insights to enhance research designs. Thirdly, an essential ethical consideration in research is ensuring a balanced assessment of potential benefits and risks, with adequate safeguards to protect participants from harm. Students’ perspectives help clarify how they perceive fair and just research, the types of benefits they expect, the harms they wish to avoid, and whether current research ethics frameworks adequately reflect these concerns. In many countries, institutional ethics review bodies are responsible for determining how benefits and risks should be balanced in SoTL research. This thesis critically explores the extent to which participants’ perspectives align with or diverge from the principles underpinning ethics review frameworks. Central to the inquiry is an examination of whether these frameworks, originally designed for biomedical research, adequately capture the ethical dimensions of SoTL research.

Conducted across two international contexts, within a health faculty at a university in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ), where ethics approval is required for SoTL research, and in Sweden, where it is generally not, this international multi-site case study offers a comparative lens on ethical governance. It involves 34 students from the NZ university and eight from the Swedish counterpart. To enrich the comparative analysis, interviews were also conducted with five SoTL research-active academics in NZ. Participants engaged with a series of vignettes, each based on research from a cross-sectional review, and explored the factors that would influence their decision to participate in each scenario.

Themes generated through reflexive thematic analysis offer a participant-informed perspective on ethical conduct in SoTL research. Findings indicate that students from both NZ and Sweden view SoTL research participation as a voluntary and informed choice, emphasising personal agency. Trust in lecturers and existing relationships are key motivators, and they generally do not see themselves as vulnerable, provided their grades are protected. Their experiential knowledge offers practical guidance for ethical research design. By contrast, NZ academics, while aiming to act with integrity, often align with institutional concerns about potential coercion and power dynamics in SoTL research. Student participants from Sweden report having greater opportunities to actively learn about research and research ethics compared to the students in NZ. Notably, in Sweden, ethics approval is typically not required for SoTL research, and students are permitted to practice research skills in their capacity as learners without formal ethics review. For Swedish students, there was a greater sense that through hands-on experiences, research ethics has become a normalised part of research. In contrast, NZ students are more likely to conceptualise and discuss research ethics in terms of the administrative process of ethics review.

This case study contributes to ongoing debates about the suitability of existing ethics frameworks for research beyond biomedical contexts. The key takeaway from this research is that both cohorts of students approached ethical considerations in SoTL with less concern than institutional ethics review bodies. Students prioritise values such as trust, reciprocity, and relational engagement over biomedical principles. In SoTL research, meaningful alternatives may already exist by integrating research ethics into the curriculum. This thesis advocates for increased opportunities for students and academics to actively partner in SoTL research and ethics processes, fostering deeper understanding, enhanced moral judgment, and more contextually relevant ethical practices.