Class Reflection: Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Reminder: both a hard copy and electronic copy of all assignments should be turned in. If you haven’t done so already, leave a printout of your bibliography in the box outside Lourdes’ office door.

Class discussion on readings:

Ethics and the IRB: Mackey & Gass (2005)

A debriefing session should take place between researcher and participants to discuss research findings.

The research objectives should be discussed vaguely with participants before they consent. But don’t reveal too much information—it could affect participants’ behavior and skew the results. Never lie to participants about how the knowledge will be used.

Consider the language proficiency level of the participants when designing a consent form.

IRB approval is also required when carrying out research in other countries because the research is nevertheless affiliated with the university.

Recorded verbal consent in adequate, for example when conducting qualitative interview research.

If the IRB denies an application, they will explain what needs to be changed in order to obtain approval.

Always consider the anonymity of participants and be certain that the reader is not able to figure out the identity of the participants. If necessary, change inconsequential details to protect the participants. Consent is not enough, anonymity is essential too.

If you choose to obtain IRB approval, acknowledge it in your paper.

SLS research is usually exempted, but still must be granted by the IRB.

Sometimes proposals are denied due to lack of scientific merit—that is, to be ethical, research projects must be worth participants’ time.

TBLT: Skehan (2003)

Although difficult to define, TBLT can be thought of in terms of the “learning by doing” or “learning by using” principle of language learning.

There are many different versions of TBLT—from weak to radical forms.

The example of cooking in English was used to illustrate the idea that doing/using fuels learning.