The role of ethics in Student Life sponsored projects that are outside of IRB’s authority
(e.g. projects that do not constitute human subjects research).
Although common, it is a mistaken belief that an IRB’s decision not to review a project is a
statement of approval. More accurately, it is simply stating that the project does not fall under
the jurisdiction of the IRB. And many of Student Life’s projects will not ultimately fall under
IRB’s purview, however we are still responsible for ethical considerations.
The IRB’s mission and authority are very limited and focused, intended only to apply a level of
care and due diligence in research involving human subjects. It is grounded in the Belmont
Report (1979) that was drafted in response to a litany of social justice issues and abuses upon
humans involved in research, as well as some assessment and medical activities. For more info
on those abuses, see Wikipedia article on “Unethical human experimentation in the United
States.”
While the Belmont Report established ethics for the specific context of research, it was
recognized that these ethics had application outside the realm of research and into much of our
work in Student Life. The principles outlined in the Belmont Report influenced the work of
Kitchener (1985), who established 5 ethical principles (for all student affairs efforts) that are
widely accepted today, comprising part of ACPA’s Statement of Ethical Principles and
Standards, and influencing NASPA’s Standards of Professional Practice and CAS’s Statement
of Shared Ethical Principles (http://www.cas.edu/ethics).
Those 5 principles developed to guide our efforts are:
 Respect autonomy
 Do no harm
 Benefit others
 Be just
 Be faithful
Later, Kitchener’s principles were applied and detailed in the assessment context by Upcraft and
Schuh (1996) in Assessment in Student Affairs, the authoritative text on the subject in our field.
Thus, when our efforts to collect data do not fall under the jurisdiction of IRB, it is still
incumbent upon Student Affairs professionals to ensure the projects they are engaged in adhere
to these established ethics, even in our programmatic efforts. Students engaged in diversity
related activities share information and can experience thoughts of guilt, persecution,
embarrassment, and more. Information revealed in those contexts can be misused by anyone
present. Students in an alcohol-related workshop may experience feelings of intimidation
depending on perceptions of authority and may share information unwillingly, and a power and
privilege experience (e.g. “Archie Bunker’s Neighborhood” could mimic behaviors and intense
Student Life Assessment and Research
6203 University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-5256 T (541) 346-8267 F (541) 346-6048
http://sa-assessment.uoregon.edu/
An equal-opportunity, affirmative-action institution committed to cultural diversity and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
emotions similar to the Stanford Prison experiment. Students participating in a race and
ethnicity program that involves analyzing their DNA could learn from their results that their
parents are not their parents after all or that they are at high risk for a terminal condition. Thus,
it is very important that professionals be aware of and adhere to these ethics in all of our
efforts. That doesn’t mean we avoid engaging students in meaningful educational experiences,
rather we ensure the experiences adhere to the ethical principles.
When collecting data, these ethics translate into the following:
 Assessment of risks and benefits: The risks are thoughtfully evaluated, mediated as
much as possible, and the benefit to the participant and/or society justifies the risk.
 Appropriate selection of participants: Participants are selected in such a way that does
not favor, benefit or harm, etc. any individual or group over others, especially groups that
are underprivileged, oppressed, incarcerated, or do not have the capacity to give informed
consent.
 Informed consent: Participants are fully informed of what data is collected, why and
how it will be used, and potential risks (even unlikely ones) and benefits. They must be
freely able to opt out without any intentional or unintentional influence or coercion (peer
pressure, perceived power to punish, etc.).
Generally we adhere to these ethics by doing the:
 We analyze the potential risks and benefits to the participants and our community
o Risks can include
 Emotional feelings, such as discomfort, guilt, shame, embarrassment, etc.
 Breach of confidentiality that stems from storage and sharing of data,
collection of data in a public setting where they could be recognized, etc.
 Inability to retract data once offered
o Benefits can include
 Improved services for students
 Greater resource efficiency
 Enhanced skills or knowledge of the participants
 Enhanced knowledge that could help others in the community
 We develop means to mediate as much of the risk as possible, such as
o Collecting data confidentially or anonymously
o Securing and managing data in a safe and secure manner
o Providing appropriate debriefs and access to counselors or relevant staff
o Providing pre-requisite training to prepare students for the experience
 We ensure participant selection is just and fair by evaluating our selection method to
determine if any particular group or subset of the population is unduly exposed to a
disproportionate degree of risk or benefit.
 We develop sound means to inform participants about why we are providing the
experience and how it will be useful to them, why we are collecting the data and how it
will be used, and what the risks and benefits are before they consent to participate. We
Student Life Assessment and Research
6203 University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-5256 T (541) 346-8267 F (541) 346-6048
http://sa-assessment.uoregon.edu/
An equal-opportunity, affirmative-action institution committed to cultural diversity and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act

ensure that they can discontinue their participation at any point of the process, and when
feasible, we allow them control over their data.
We ensure participants have access to the results, our interpretation of those results,
and our responses that result from it.
These steps do require staff to engage a possibly more thoughtful and complex planning process,
and that can be viewed as a burden, but in practice, these efforts are not very intrusive at all.
Assessing risks and benefits, and determining means to mediate risks, is a natural part of our
intentional planning process as we plan any activity. Similarly, evaluating the equity and
fairness of how we select participants is also a staple of our planning process. We simply need
to broaden our awareness and consideration of these aspects. A well written, informed consent
notice can be crafted fairly easily for written, digital, and verbal contexts, examples of which
include FERPA waivers, liability waivers, study abroad risk waivers, etc. Ensuring access can
be achieved in a multitude of ways, including posting online, special communication campaigns,
open meetings to debrief the project or experience, etc.
If ensuring the safety and wellbeing of our participants does require significant work and effort,
it is most likely due to a high level of risk, and is therefore warranted.
This is intended to help explain the purpose, value, and utility of these ethics in our work as well
as how they can be implemented unobtrusively. If you have any questions, please feel free to
contact the Student Life Assessment and Research Office at 541-346-8267 or
saassess@uoregon.edu.
Student Life Assessment and Research
6203 University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-5256 T (541) 346-8267 F (541) 346-6048
http://sa-assessment.uoregon.edu/
An equal-opportunity, affirmative-action institution committed to cultural diversity and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act