Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Group Projects

1. Break students into groups and have them read a document outlining and describing the Nazi Human Experiments. Have them discuss the following questions in their small groups and then have a large group discussion.

1. What was the purpose of the studies? What were they trying to deduce?
2. Where were subjects found for this study?
3. How long did the study last?
4. How did the study violate the ethical guidelines for:

a. respect and autonomy
b. beneficence and nonmaleficence
c. justice
d. trust
e. fidelity and scientific integrity

5. What were the consequences of these studies for:

                                 a. the subjects
                                 b. the researchers
                                 c. the larger legal community
                                 d. larger scientific community

2. Have students read two studies that worked with human subjects, one from the natural sciences and the latter from the social sciences. Have them develop informed consent documents for each study, including benefits, side effects, and all other portions of informed consent. Have them compare these informed consent forms (social science vs natural science) with a partner? Which one poses greater threats to participants? Which one offers greater compensation? Which one offers the largest potential growth to the research community and broader public?

3. Instruct students to research the university’s Institutional Review Board. Have them gather all of the necessary documents they will need to submit a study to the board. Students will then fill out a research review application form (more than likely posted on the IRB website) for the study they chose for the above activity. Students should include the informed consent document they developed above.
 

Mini Projects

1. Internet Research
   Internet research poses its own set of challenges and benefits. To understand these dynamics, have students:
   
   1. Identify an article in a relevant social work journal that utilizes internet research methods.
   2. Read the article and note any mentions made by the author to specific precautions taken given the nature of online research as well as the reasons for pursuing this line of inquiry online.
   3. Address the issues of public and private space, confidentiality, emotional harm, and informed consent within the context of the article. How do you know and/or assume they addressed these issues? How could they have better managed these areas?
   4. Consider if this research could have been accomplished without the substantial use of the internet. Conceptualize what this would have entailed.

2.  Document All Procedures
Social work researchers should disclose the methods on which their conclusions are based so that others can evaluate for themselves the likely soundness of these conclusions. Such disclosure is a key feature of science. By documenting procedures, other researchers will know how the study was completed and can replicate the study.

1. Each student should select both a quantitative and qualitative study to review.
2. Students should document the methods utilized in each study.
3. Have them list the steps of the study as if they were going to replicate it exactly.
4. Were the steps easy to find? What were the differences in steps between the qualitative and quantitative studies?
5. Have students share their answers with the class.

3. Exempt, Expedited, or Full Review?
IRB reviews generally fall into three categories: exempt status determination, expedited reviews, and full committee reviews. In this activity, students will compare and contrast each of these.

1. Have students review federal regulations regarding the IRB. They can review these regulations here: www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/ohrpregulations.pdf
2. Have students create a graphic or tabular representation of the eligibility criteria for each category.
3. Students will then search scholarly peer-reviewed journals and identify studies which fit into the exempt, expedited, and full review categories utilizing their graph/table. If uncertain, students should review step 1 and use an iterative process to narrow their eligibility criteria.