Abbott, L., & Grady, C. A. (2011). A systematic review of the empirical literature evaluating IRBs: What we know and what we still need to learn. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6(1), 3–19.
American Psychological Association (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. https://www.apa.org/ethics/code. Accessed 27 January 2019.
Anderson, G. (2011). Students as valuable but vulnerable participants in research: Getting the balance right using a feminist approach and focus group interviews. Evidence Based Midwifery, 9(1), 30–34.
Atta, I. S., & Alghamdi, A. H. (2018). The efficacy of self-directed learning versus problem-based learning for teaching and learning ophthalmology: A comparative study. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 9, 623–630. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S171328.
Aycock, D. M., & Currie, E. R. (2013). Minimizing risks for nursing students recruited for health and educational research. Nurse Educator, 38(2), 56–60.
Bartholomay, E. M., & Sifers, S. K. (2016). Student perception of pressure in faculty-led research. Learning and Individual Differences, 50, 302–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.08.025.
Bassey, M. (1981). Pedagogic Research: On the relative merits of search for generalisation and study of single events. Oxford Review of Education, 7(1), 73–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305498810070108.
Bayazit, A., Bayram, S., & Cumaoglu, G. K. (2018). Investigating the relationship between task complexity, cognitive ability and disorientation in hypertext navigation. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 10(4), 115–127.
Beach, D., & Arrazola, B. V. (2019). Ethical review boards: Constitutions, functions, tensions and blind spots. In H. Busher & A. Fox (Eds.), Implementing ethics in educational ethnography (pp. 32–47). Oxon: Routledge.
BMC Medical Education (2020). Editorial policies: Ethics and consent. https://www.biomedcentral.com/getpublished/editorial-policies#ethics+and+consent. Accessed 26 January 2020.
Bouësseau, M.-C., & Coleman, C. H. (2008). How do we know that research ethics committees are really working? The neglected role of outcomes assessment in research ethics review. BMC Medical Ethics, 1, 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-9-6.
Boyer, E. L., Moser, D., Ream, T. C., & Braxton, J. M. (2015). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Bracken-Roche, D., Bell, E., Macdonald, M. E., & Racine, E. (2017). The concept of ‘vulnerability’in research ethics: An in-depth analysis of policies and guidelines. Health research policy and systems, 15(1), 8.
Bradbury-Jones, C., Stewart, S., Irvine, F., & Sambrook, S. (2011). Nursing students' experiences of being a research participant: Findings from a longitudinal study. Nurse Education Today, 31(1), 107–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2010.04.006.
Brown, C., Spiro, J., & Quinton, S. (2020). The role of research ethics committees: Friend or foe in educational research? An exploratory study. British Educational Research Journal, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3654.
Busher, H., & Fox, A. (Eds.). (2019). Implementing ethics in educational ethnography. Oxon: Routledge.
Cleary, M., Walter, G., & Jackson, D. (2014). Above all,‘do no harm’: Key considerations when including students as research participants in higher education settings. Contemporary Nurse, 49, 93–95.
Comer, S. K. (2009). The ethics of conducting educational research on your own students. Journal of Nursing Law, 13(4), 100–105. https://doi.org/10.1891/1073-74184.108.40.206.
Committee on Publication Ethics (n.d.). Promoting integrity in research and its publication. https://publicationethics.org. Accessed 25 January 2019.
Cooper, S., Seaton, P., Absalom, I., Cant, R., Bogossian, F., Kelly, M., Levett-Jones, T., McKenna, L., & Collectively ‐ The Education, Simulation and Safety (ESS) Collaboration. (2018). Can scholarship in nursing/midwifery education result in a successful research career? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 74, 2703–2705. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13698.
de Wet, K. (2010). The importance of ethical appraisal in social science research: Reviewing a faculty of humanities' research ethics committee. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8(4), 301–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-010-9118-8.
Dingwall, R. (2016). The social costs of ethics regulation. In W. C. van den Hoonaard & A. Hamilton (Eds.), The ethics rupture: Exploring alternatives to formal research ethics review (pp. 25–42). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Dougherty, D., & Kramer, M. W. (2005). A rationale for scholarly examination of institutional review boards: A case study. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 33(3), 183–188.
Dyrbye, L. N., Thomas, M. R., Mechaber, A. J., Eacker, A., Harper, W., Massie Jr., F. S., Power, D. V., & Shanafelt, T. D. (2007). Medical education research and IRB review: An analysis and comparison of the IRB review process at six institutions. Academic Medicine, 82(7), 654–660.
Dyrbye, L. N., Thomas, M. R., Papp, K. K., & Durning, S. J. (2008). Clinician educators’ experiences with institutional review boards: Results of a national survey. Academic Medicine, 83(6), 590–595.
Educational Technology Research and Development (2020). Submission guidelines. https://www.springer.com/journal/11423/submission-guidelines#Instructions%20for%20Authors_Compliance%20with%20Ethical%20Standards. Accessed 25 January 2020.
Eikelboom, J. I., ten Cate, O. T. J., Jaarsma, D., Raat, J. A. N., Schuwirth, L., & van Delden, J. J. M. (2012). A framework for the ethics review of education research. Medical Education, 46(8), 731–733. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04293.x.
Emanuel, E. J., Wood, A., Alan, F., Bowen, A., Getz, K. A., Grady, C., et al. (2004). Oversight of human participants research: Identifying problems to evaluate reform proposals. Annals of Internal Medicine, 4, 282.
Farquhar, J. M., Kamei, R. K., & Vidyarthi, A. R. (2018). Strategies for enhancing medical student resilience: Student and faculty member perspectives. International Journal of Medical Education, 9, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5a46.1ccc.
Finlay, K. A., & Fernandez, C. V. (2008). Failure to report and provide commentary on research ethics board approval and informed consent in medical journals. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(10), 761–764. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2007.023325.
Forester, J. P., & McWhorter, D. L. (2005). Medical students' perceptions of medical education research and their roles as participants. Academic Medicine: Journal Of The Association Of American Medical Colleges, 80(8), 780–785.
Gharravi, A. M. (2018). Impact of instructor-provided notes on the learning and exam performance of medical students in an organ system-based medical curriculum. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 9, 665–672. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S172345.
Ghazal, L., Aijaz, A., Parpio, Y., Tharani, A., & Gul, R. B. (2018). Feed-forward: Paving ways for students' subsequent learning. Nurse Education Today, 71, 116–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.010.
Godbold, R., Lees, A., & Reay, S. (2019). Ethical challenges for student design projects in health care settings in New Zealand. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 38(1), 182–192.
Gontcharov, I., & MacDonald, L. (2016). Alternative models of ethical governance: The 2016 New Brunswick-Otago declaration on research ethics. New Zealand Sociology, 31(4), 56–69.
Grinnell, F. (2004). Subject vulnerability: The precautionary principle. The American Journal of Bioethics, 4(3), 72–74.
Hack, C. (2015). Pedagogic research in the UK higher education sector: Are the ethical review processes fit for purpose? Saarbrucken: Lap-Lambert.
Haigh, N. (2010). The scholarship of teaching and learning: A practical introduction and critique. Wellington: Ako Aotearoa – The National Centre for Tertiary Teaching Excellence.
Hally, E., & Walsh, K. (2016). Research ethics and medical education. Medical Teacher, 38(1), 105–106. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.956068.
Halse, C., & Honey, A. (2005). Unraveling ethics: Illuminating the moral dilemmas of research ethics. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(4), 2141–2162. https://doi.org/10.1086/428419.
Halse, C., & Honey, A. (2007). Rethinking ethics review as institutional discourse. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(3), 336–352.
Hamilton, A. (2016). Research ethics review and compliatorianism. In W. C. van den Hoonaard & A. Hamilton (Eds.), The ethics rupture: Exploring alternatives to formal research ethics review (pp. 335–352). Toronto: Toronto University Press.
Hamilton, A., & van den Hoonaard, W. C. (2016). So where from here? Finding paths through the bramble of research ethics review. In W. C. van den Hoonaard & A. Hamilton (Eds.), The ethics rupture: Exploring alternatives to formal research ethics review. Toronto: Toronto University Press.
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2007). Heutagogy: A child of complexity theory. Complicity: an International Journal of Complexity and Education, 4, 111–118.
Head, G. (2020). Ethics in educational research: Review boards, ethical issues and researcher development. European Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904118796315.
Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching to benefit student learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29(2), 183–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260500130387.
Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2009). Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. York: Higher Education Academy.
Hearnshaw, H. (2004). Comparison of requirements of research ethics committees in 11 European countries for a non-invasive interventional study. BMJ: British Medical Journal(7432), 140.
Henry, R. C., & Wright, D. E. (2001). When do medical students become human subjects of research? The case of program evaluation. Academic Medicine, 76(9), 871–875.
Holland, K. (2016). Enriching ethics review processes in the spirit of participatory dialogue. In W. C. van den Hoonaard & A. Hamilton (Eds.), The ethics rupture: Exploring alternatives to formal research ethics review (pp. 353–375). Toronto: Toronto University Press.
Howe, K. R., & Dougherty, K. C. (1993). Ethics, institutional review boards, and the changing face of educational research. Educational Researcher, 22(9), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176766.
Howe, K. R., & Moses, M. S. (1999). Ethics in educational research. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 21–59. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X024001021.
Iizuka, H., & Lefor, A. K. (2018). Does the consecutive interpreting approach enhance medical English communication skills of Japanese-speaking students? International Journal of Medical Education, 9, 101–107. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5abe.0eb5.
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (n.d.). Review process. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/ij-sotl/review_process.html. Accessed 13 Sept 2019.
International Journal of Educational Technology (n.d.). Submissions. https://educationaltechnology.net/ijet/index.php/ijet/about/submissions Accessed 27 January 2019.
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education (2019). Editoral policies: Ethics and consent. https://www.springeropen.com/get-published/editorial-policies#ethics+and+consent. Accessed 27 January 2019.
Israel, M., Allen, G., & Thomson, C. (2016). Australian research ethics governance: Plotting the demise of the adverserial culture. In W. C. van den Hoonaard & A. Hamilton (Eds.), The ethics rupture: Exploring alternatives to formal research ethics review. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Johnson, B., Harrison, L., & Ollis, D. (2019). Resisting ethics over-regulation in research into sexuality and relationships education: Insights from an Australian study. The Australian Educational Researcher, 1-17.
Kara, H. (2018). Research ethics in the real world: Euro-Western and Indigenous perspectives. Bristol: Policy press.
Lederman, R. (2016). Fieldwork double-bound in human research ethics reviews: Disciplinary competence, or regulatory compliance and the muting of disciplinary values. In W. C. van den Hoonaard & A. Hamilton (Eds.), The ethics rupture: Exploring alternatives to formal research ethics review (p. 464). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Lenette, C., Botfield, J. R., Boydell, K., Haire, B., Newman, C. E., & Zwi, A. B. (2018). Beyond compliance checking: A situated approach to visual research ethics. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 15(2), 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-018-9850-0.
Levine, C., Faden, R., Grady, C., Hammerschmidt, D., Eckenwiler, L., & Sugarman, J. (2004). The limitations of "vulnerability" as a protection for human research participants. The American Journal of Bioethics, 4(3), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160490497083.
Liamputtong, P. (2007). Researching the vulnerable: A guide to sensitive research methods. London: Sage.
Loftin, C., Campanella, H., & Gilbert, S. (2011). Ethical issues in nursing education: The dual-role researcher. Teaching and Learning in Nursing., 6(3), 139–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2011.01.005.
Luo, S., & Kalman, M. (2018). Using summary videos in online classes for nursing students: A mixed methods study. Nurse Education Today, 71, 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.032.
Lynch, H. F. (2018). Opening closed doors: Promoting IRB transparency. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 46(1), 145–158.
Lynch, H. F., Nicholls, S., Meyer, M. N., & Taylor, H. A. (2019). Of parachutes and participant protection: Moving beyond quality to advance effective research ethics oversight. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 14(3), 190–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264618812625.
Maskell, N. A., Jones, E. L., & Davies, R. J. O. (2003). Variations in experience in obtaining local ethical approval for participation in a multi-Centre study. QJM: An International Journal of Medicine, 96, 305–307. https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcg042.
McKinney, K. (2006). Attitudinal and structural factors contributing to challenges in the work of the scholarship of teaching and learning. New directions for institutional research(129), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.170.
Molina, A. I., Arroyo, Y., Lacave, C., & Redondo, M. A. (2018). Learn-CIAN: A visual language for the modelling of group learning processes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(6), 1096–1112. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12680.
Nicholls, S. G., Hayes, T. P., Brehaut, J. C., McDonald, M., Weijer, C., Saginur, R., & Fergusson, D. (2015). A scoping review of empirical research relating to quality and effectiveness of research ethics review. PLoS One, 10(7), e0133639.
Nilsson, J., Engström, M., Florin, J., Gardulf, A., & Carlsson, M. (2018). A short version of the nurse professional competence scale for measuring nurses' self-reported competence. Nurse Education Today, 71, 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.028.
Pitt, P. (2014). "The project cannot be approved in its current form": Feminist visual research meets the human research ethics committee. Australian Educational Researcher, 41(3), 311–325.
Prosser, M. (2008). The scholarship of teaching and learning: What is it? A personal view. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2008.020202.
Raykov, M. (2020). Education researchers’ perceptions of and experiences with the research ethics application process in Europe and beyond. European Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 10–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904119893461.
Reierson, I. A., Haukedal, T. A., Hedeman, H., & Bjork, I. T. (2017). Structured debriefing: What difference does it make? Nurse Education in Practice, 25(104–110), 104–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2017.04.013.
Rice, T. W. (2008). The historical, ethical, and legal background of human-subjects research. Respiratory Care, 53(10), 1325–1329.
Sarpel, U., Hopkins, M. A., More, F., Yavner, S., Pusic, M., Nick, M. W., Song, H., Ellaway, R., & Kalet, A. L. (2013). Medical students as human subjects in educational research. Medical Education Online, 18, 18. https://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v18i0.19524.
Scherzinger, G., & Bobbert, M. (2017). Evaluation of research ethics committees: Criteria for the ethical quality of the review process. Accountability in Research, 24(3), 152–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2016.1273778.
Schön, D. A. (1995). Knowing-in-action: The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27(6), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1995.10544673.
Schrag, Z. (2016). Ethical pluralism: Scholarly societies and the regulation of research ethics. In W. C. van den Hoonaard & A. Hamilton (Eds.), The ethics rupture: Exploring alternatives to formal research ethics review (pp. 317–334). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Schroter, S., Plowman, R., Hutchings, A., & Gonzalez, A. (2006). Reporting ethics committee approval and patient consent by study design in five general medical journals. Journal of Medical Ethics, 32(12), 718–723.
Scott, C. L., & Fonseca, L. (2010). Overstepping the mark: Ethics procedures, risky research and education researchers. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 33(3), 287–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2010.511710.
Sellman, D. (2016). The practice of nursing research: Getting ready for ‘ethics’ and the matter of character. Nursing Inquiry, 23(1), 24–31.
Sikes, P., & Piper, H. (2010). Ethical research, academic freedom and the role of ethics committees and review procedures in educational research. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2010.511838.
Simons, H., & Usher, R. (2000). Introduction: Ethics in the practice of research. In H. Simons & R. Usher (Eds.), Situated ethics in educational Research (pp. 1–11). London: Routledge.
Sullivan, G. M. (2011). Education research and human subject protection: Crossing the IRB quagmire. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 3(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-11-00004.1.
Tangen, R. (2014). Balancing ethics and quality in educational research—The ethical matrix method. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(6), 678–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.821089.
Teo, P. (2019). Teaching for the 21st century: A case for dialogic pedagogy. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 21, 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.03.009.
Thomas, G. (2016). How to do your case study: A guide for students and researchers (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Thomas, G., & Myers, K. (2015). The anatomy of the case study. London: Sage.
Tolich, M. (2010). Researching with integrity: The ethics of academic inquiry. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), 317–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2010.512098.
Tolich, M., & Fitzgerald, M. H. (2006). If ethics committees were designed for ethnography. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 1(2), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1525/jer.2006.1.2.71.
Tsan, M.-F. (2019). Measuring the quality and performance of institutional review boards. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 14(3), 187–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264618804686.
Tsuruwaka, M., & Asahara, K. (2018). Narrative writing as a strategy for nursing ethics education in Japan. International Journal of Medical Education, 9, 198–205. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5b39.d5d2.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (2016). The Belmont report. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html Accessed 18 May 2019.
van den Hoonaard, W. C. (2016). The New Brunswick declaration on research ethics, integrity, and governance. Journal of Clinical Research and Bioethics, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9627.1000268.
van den Hoonaard, W. C., & Hamilton, A. (2016). The ethics rupture summit in the context of current trends in research review. In W. C. van den Hoonaard & A. Hamilton (Eds.), The ethics rupture: Exploring alternatives to formal research ethics review. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
van den Hoonaard, W. C., & Tolich, M. (2014). The New Brunswick declaration of research ethics: A simple and radical perspective. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 39(1), 87–97.
Vermeylen, S., & Clark, G. (2017). An alternative ethics for research: Levinas and the unheard voices and unseen faces. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(5), 499–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1220117.
Weinbaum, C., Landree, E., Blumenthal, M. S., Piquado, T., & Gutierrez, C. I. (2019). Ethics in scientific Research. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Weiss, B. D., Smith, M. A., & Magill, M. K. (2005). Journal policy statement - IRB approval for educational research. Family Medicine, 37(3), 219–220.
Whitney, S. N. (2016). Balanced ethics review. Cham: Springer.
Whitney, S. N., & Schneider, C. E. (2011). Viewpoint: A method to estimate the cost in lives of ethics board review of biomedical research. Journal of Internal Medicine, 269(4), 396–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02351_2.x.
Willey, J. M., Lim, Y. S., & Kwiatkowski, T. (2018). Modeling integration: Co-teaching basic and clinical sciences medicine in the classroom. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 9, 739–751. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S169740.
World Medical Association. (2013). Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical pinciples for medical research involving human subjects. Journal of the American Medical Association, 310(20), 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
Wright, N., & Charnock, D. (2018). Challenging oppressive practice in mental health: The development and evaluation of a video based resource for student nurses. Nurse Education in Practice, 33, 42–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2018.08.016.
Wynn, L. L. (2011). Ethnographers’ experiences of institutional ethics oversight: Results from a quantitative and qualitative survey. Journal of Policy History, 23(1), 94–114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898030610000333.
Yank, V., & Rennie, D. (2002). Reporting of informed consent and ethics committee approval in clinical trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(21), 2835–2838. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.21.2835.