Research Compliance Analyst University of Virginia Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
Background: Universities promote undergraduate independent research through thesis, capstone, and summer projects. At our institution, undergraduates may be the PI on social and behavioral sciences studies that often require IRB review. These novice researchers need extra assistance in understanding the IRB process. How can the IRB best support undergraduate researchers?
Program
Description: The IRB for Social and Behavioral Sciences (SBS) takes a multi-pronged approach to reach undergraduate researchers. IRB-SBS has dedicated a Student Support Specialist on staff who holds in-person IRB “office hours” and virtual IRB consultations, and teaches IRB orientations for undergraduate research methods seminars.
In-person IRB advising for students is held 2 hours per week when classes are in session, in the undergraduate advising center in the undergraduate library, a central location that all undergraduates are familiar with. IRB advising hours are promoted through several channels: promotional posters in the undergraduate advising center, the monthly IRB newsletter sent to all IRB-SBS faculty researchers, the IRB-SBS website (including a page dedicated to student research), and the IRB-SBS web calendar.
Virtual IRB consultations are available by appointment to those who cannot make the regular drop-in hours.
In-class IRB orientations are offered to research methods seminars that are required for capstone/thesis students.
Program
Assessment: Both in-person and virtual consultations allow staff to walk a student researcher through the online protocol submission system and to highlight key sections and potential pitfalls. Consultations focus on a range of topics, from the basics of how to write a protocol to how to handle verbal consent. Meetings are most frequent when students are planning capstone/thesis/summer research projects and after they receive research funding.
In-class IRB orientations introduce undergraduates to the basics of research ethics and the IRB, and allow time to answer specific questions about the students’ research projects and IRB review. Students also practice completing a simplified protocol for their projects.
Students and faculty advisors appreciate making a connection with an actual person in the IRB. A student might first hear about IRB-SBS in an in-class visit, then drop by the in-person office hours to get tips on how to set up their protocol, and then meet with IRB-SBS staff virtually with any further questions. This combined approach builds stronger relationships with student researchers and improves the quality of their protocol submissions.
Limitations: One limitation is lack of faculty advisor supervision. IRB-SBS is piloting an online tool for faculty advisors of student research to help alleviate this issue and add to our combined approach. Another limitation is last minute student protocol submissions. Our continued outreach to faculty advising capstone/thesis students is beginning to help “get the word out” about our services for students. We expect that this will help prevent future last minute protocol submissions from students.
Discussion: A multi-pronged approach is optimal for reaching undergraduate student researchers most effectively. Student protocol submissions are stronger because of the personalized attention they receive. Offering in-person student advising, virtual appointments, and in-class visits has increased on-campus awareness of IRB-SBS for both undergraduate researchers and their faculty mentors, helping students develop as researchers and improving the IRB’s relationship with the university research community. Other IRBs may find this multi-pronged approach useful for outreach purposes and to help dispel the “mystery” and stress associated with the IRB review process for undergraduate researchers.
