Research ethics committees: values and power in higher education

The rise of research governance structures in universities has created huge disquiet amongst academic researchers. The unquestioning adoption of a medical model of ethical review based upon positivist methodological assumptions has created for many a mismatch between their own ongoing ethical research practice and the process of obtaining clearance from Research Ethics Committees (REC). This paper examines the issues that have contributed to dissatisfaction with the ethical review model that is prevalent within the modern university. Using examples from the authors’ own experiences, the dynamics of values, interests and power in research governance is examined from multiple perspectives including that of REC member and applicant; lecturer/student supervisor; researcher; and
university administrator. The paper reveals a rift between the values and objectives of the key players in research governance within the modern university and concludes by asking whether differences can be resolved so that a collaborative approach to ethical review may be incorporated into a renewed academic research culture. It is suggested that the alternative is increasing alienation from anything to do with ‘ethics’, with potentially serious consequences for the ethical standards of social research.

The student experience in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs): phenomenological analysis

Background and purpose
The dominant psychometric discourse of OSCEs may lead to unexpected problems, such as a checklist-based student performance1 which under emphasises the clinical relationship with student and standardised patient (SP). Such encounters can be dehumanising for SPs2 and have implications for what students learn about relational skills through the assessment process. In this study we explore medical students’ experiences of undertaking OSCEs using a phenomenological frame.
Methodology
Interpretative phenomenological analysis is a form of qualitative methodology which has strong resonance with existentialism and focuses on the lived experience without significant reference to external political or discursive
forces.
Six 4th year undergraduate medical students from Queen’s University Belfast were recruited in December 2013. Maximum variation sampling was used. Students were interviewed by a researcher in the week prior to the
OSCE and then again in the week following the OSCE in Jan 2014. Interviews were minimally structured in order to be open to respondents, rather than adhering to a fixed topic guide, but focussed on participants’ experiences, thoughts and feelings about taking part in OSCEs. Interviews were audio-recorded and
transcribed. Students were also asked to complete a short diary entry in the days prior to the OSCEs and another immediately following. Diary entries were written, emailed or audio-recorded at student’s preference.
Results
Transcripts are currently being analysed by interpretative phenomenological analysis. Preliminary analysis has demonstrated the significance of students’ relationships within the OSCE triad (student, SP and examiner); the effect of the immediate examination environment; realism versus roleplay; students’ perceptions of the purpose of assessment; and coping mechanisms.
Full results will be available by the time of the conference.
Conclusion and Discussion
Understanding the student experience in OSCEs is a crucial step in understanding the complex construction of relationships within the OSCE triad. The focus in OSCEs is typically on standardisation and reliability, but in exploring social interactions we may refocus attention on their inherent potential for learning and effects on both students and patients.
References
1. Hodges B. Medical education and the maintenance of incompetence. Med Teach 2006;28(8):690-6
2. Johnston JL, Lundy G, McCullough M, Gormley GJ. The view from over there: reframing the OSCE through the experience of standardised patient
raters. Med Educ 2013;47(9):899-909