“Like a Sheriff in a Small Town”: Status, Roles, and Challenges of Ethics Committees in Academic Colleges of Education

2021 ◽  
pp. 155626462110052
Author(s):  
Daniel Sperling
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Formal Training ◽  
Colleges Of Education ◽  
Research Ethics Committees ◽  
Ministry Of Education ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Academic Management ◽  
Complex Relationships ◽  
Shed Light

In recent years, Research Ethics Committees in academic colleges of education have constituted to review research proposals in the field of education. Yet, little is known about their work, composition, challenges, and relationships with external partners. This study explores the views and attitudes of 13 members and chairpersons of Research Ethics Committees in colleges of education in Israel, and two policy makers at the Ministry of Education about their roles, responsibilities, challenges, and limitations. Findings revealed an instrumental attitude towards the ethics committee. Committees are perceived as supportive rather than enforcing. Interviews shed light on the complex relationships between committee members, college lecturers/researchers, ethics regulators, and academic management. Moreover, the findings emphasized the lack of formal training and broad discussion on ethics. The study calls for strengthening committees’ raison d'être and the internalization of ethics among committee members, researchers, and lecturers in the field of education.

A Survey to Determine the Capacity Development Needs of Research Ethics Committee Administrators in South Africa

2021 ◽  
pp. 155626462110567
Author(s):  
Mutshidzi A. Mulondo ◽  
Joyce M. Tsoka-Gwegweni ◽  
Puleng LenkaBula ◽  
Perpetual Chikobvu
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Capacity Development ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Formal Training ◽  
Research Ethics Committees ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Administrator Role

Most capacity development efforts for research ethics committees focus on committee members and little on ethics administrators. Increasing studies mandate the focus on administrators’ capacity development needs to enable adequate and effective committee support. This study investigated current responsibilities, training requirements, and administrator role needs. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among administrators from 62 National Health Research Ethics Council-registered research ethics committees in South Africa. In total, 36 administrators completed the questionnaire. Results show that, in addition to administration, they perform managerial, review process and guidance-advisory tasks. Nearly 49% indicated only having received informal research ethics-related training, not targeted formal training, with 81% of the informal training being through workshops. Research ethics administrators’ responsibilities have evolved to complex tasks requiring targeted capacity development efforts.

scholarly journals Evolving perspectives on broad consent for genomics research and biobanking in Africa. Report of the Second H3Africa Ethics Consultation Meeting, 11 May 2015

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. de Vries ◽  
K. Littler ◽  
A. Matimba ◽  
S. McCurdy ◽  
O. Ouwe Missi Oukem-Boyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Research Ethics Committees ◽  
Broad Consent ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Genomics Research

A report on the Second H3Africa Ethics Consultation Meeting, which was held in Livingstone, Zambia on 11 May 2015. The meeting demonstrated considerable evolution by African Research Ethics Committees on thinking about broad consent as a consent option for genomics research and biobanking. The meeting concluded with a call for broader engagement with policy makers across the continent in order to help these recognise the need for guidance and regulation where these do not exist and to explore harmonisation where appropriate and possible.

scholarly journals Philosophers in research ethics committees—what do they think they’re doing? An empirical-ethical analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Gauckler
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Applied Ethics ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Research Ethics Committees ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Discussion Section ◽  
Philosophical Perspective ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Practical Level

AbstractResearch ethics committees in Germany usually don’t have philosophers as members and if so, only contingently, not provided for by statute. This is interesting from a philosophical perspective, assuming that ethics is a discipline of philosophy. It prompts the question what role philosophers play in those committees they can be found in. Eight qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore the self-perception of philosophers regarding their contribution to research ethics committees. The results show that the participants generally don’t view themselves as ethics experts. They are rather unanimous on the competencies they think they contribute to the committee but not as to whether those are philosophical competencies or applied ethical ones. In some cases they don’t see a big difference between their role and the role of the jurist member. In the discussion section of this paper I bring up three topics, prompted by the interviews, that need to be addressed: (1) I argue that the interviewees’ unwillingness to call themselves ethics experts might have to do with a too narrow understanding of ethics expertise. (2) I argue that the disagreement among the interviewees concerning the relationship between moral philosophy and applied ethics might be explained on a theoretical or on a practical level. (3) I argue that there is some lack of clarity concerning the relationship between ethics and law in research ethics committees and that further work needs to be done here. All three topics, I conclude, need further investigation.

scholarly journals Preventing ethics dumping: the challenges for Kenyan research ethics committees

2020 ◽  
pp. 174701612092506
Author(s):  
Kate Chatfield ◽  
Doris Schroeder ◽  
Anastasia Guantai ◽  
Kirana Bhatt ◽  
Elizabeth Bukusi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Resource Constraints ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Shared Responsibility ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Research Ethics Committees ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
System Resource

Ethics dumping is the practice of undertaking research in a low- or middle-income setting which would not be permitted, or would be severely restricted, in a high-income setting. Whilst Kenya operates a sophisticated research governance system, resource constraints and the relatively low number of accredited research ethics committees limit the capacity for ensuring ethical compliance. As a result, Kenya has been experiencing cases of ethics dumping. This article presents 11 challenges in the context of preventing ethics dumping in Kenya, namely variations in governance standards, resistance to double ethics review, resource constraints, unresolved issues in the management of biological samples, unresolved issues in the management of primary data, unsuitable informed consent procedures, cultural insensitivity, differing standards of care, reluctance to provide feedback to research communities, power differentials which facilitate the exploitation of local researchers and lack of local relevance and/or affordability of the resultant products. A reflective approach for researchers, built around the values of fairness, respect, care and honesty, is presented as a means of taking shared responsibility for preventing ethics dumping.

Research ethics committees

BMJ ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 300 (6724) ◽  
pp. 608-608
Author(s):  
M. Drury
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Research Ethics Committees
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document