SAGE Journal Articles
Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.
(6.1). This article provides some perspectives about ethics according to educational practitioners.
Journal Article 1: Gordon, W., & Sork, T. J. (2001). Ethical issues and codes of ethics: Views of adult education practitioners in Canada and the United States. Adult Education Quarterly, 51, 202–218.
Abstract: Although the ethics of practice has become increasingly visible in the adult education literature over the past two decades, little empirical research has been done to inform the dialogue and debate. The purpose of this study was to examine the views of adult education practitioners in British Columbia about the need for a code of ethics and about the ethical issues, concerns, and dilemmas experienced in their practice. The study was an approximate replication of research carried out in Indiana reported by McDonald and Wood. This study was undertaken to broaden the empirical database within adult education, provide further insight into the ethics of practice, and determine similarities and differences between Canadian and American adult educators in their encounters with ethical issues and their views about codes of ethics. Major findings confirm positive practitioner views about codes of ethics and are generally consistent with the findings reported by McDonald and Wood.
(6.2). This article provides a perspective on research ethics by community members.
Journal Article 2: McDonald, K. E., Schwartz, N. M., Gibbons, C. M., & Olick, R. S. (2015). “You Can’t be Cold and Scientific”: Community views on ethical issues in intellectual disability research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 10, 196–208. doi:10.1177/1556264615575512
Abstract: Perceptions, attitudes, and ethical concerns related to conducting research with adults with intellectual disability hinder scientific innovation to promote health. Yet we lack an understanding of community views on effective research policy and practice. To address this knowledge void, we qualitatively studied the views of adults with intellectual disability and those who provide them support regarding research participation of adults with intellectual disability. We found substantial support for their inclusion, particularly given the possibility of benefits to adults with intellectual disability, researchers, and society. We also found concerns for potential harm and differing ideas on how to promote safety. Our findings emphasize the importance of their inclusion in research, and the need for policies and practices that promote respect and safety.
(6.3). This article presents research ethics from the perspective a specific research field (gifted education). You might also search for a similar article for your research field of interest.
Abstract: Most organizations (e.g., institutions of higher education, K-12 school systems) that engage in research with human subjects have institutional review boards (IRBs; also known as research committees) responsible for the oversight of research activities to ensure the ethical treatment of participants. Professional societies such as American Educational Research Association (AERA) and the American Psychological Association (APA) have also developed ethical codes for research activities involving human subjects. Many journals, including GCQ, require that all research considered for publication is accompanied by documentation of review and approval by an IRB or other similar committee. The purpose of this Methodological Brief is to provide researchers, new and experienced, within the field of gifted education a brief introduction to the ethical principles that guide the decision making process of IRBs, to provide examples of what might be considered ethical code violations, and to offer suggestions for working through the review and approval process with IRB officials.
(6.4). This is an action research perspective about the topic of this chapter (i.e., research ethics).