This article narrates the author's experience of obtaining institutional review board (IRB) approval for her dissertation study. Although her research topic was particularly sensitive, this case is illustrative of the increasing level of difficulty qualitative researchers are facing in conducting not only risky research but also work that is not aligned with the National Research Council's conception of “scientific” methodology. The author nests her story within the larger social context of surveillance and disciplinary power operating on today's educational researchers. She focuses her attention on the complex power relations among researchers, IRBs, and arbiters of what counts as quality research.
Barreca, R., & Morse, D. D. (Eds.). (1997). The erotics of instruction . Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
2.
Caputo, J.D. (1993). Against ethics: Contributions to a poetics of obligation with constant reference to deconstruction. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
3.
Cunningham, J.W. (2002). The National Reading Panel report (a review). In R. L. Allington (Ed.), Big brother and the national reading curriculum: How ideology trumped evidence (pp. 49-74). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
4.
Derrida, J. (2001, September). A dialogue with Jacques Derrida on Augustine and “circumfession.”Presentation at the Religion and Postmodernism Conference 3: Confessions, Philadelphia.
5.
Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality. Volume 1: An introduction (R. Hurley, Trans.). New York: Vintage. (Original work published 1976)
6.
Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). New York: Vintage. (Original work published 1975)
7.
Gallas, K. (1998). “Sometimes I can be anything”: Power, gender, and identity in a primary classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
8.
Gallop, J. (1997). Feminist accused of sexual harassment. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
9.
Hendrie, C. (1998). Sex with students: When employees cross the line . Education Week. Retrieved August 2, 2004 from from http://www.edweek.org/we/vol-18/14abuse.h18
10.
hooks, b. (2003). Teaching community: A pedagogy of hope. New York: Routledge.
11.
Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). What Works Clearinghouse. Retrieved September 20, 2006, from http://www.whatworks.ed.gov
12.
Kirsch, G.E. (1999). Ethical dilemmas in feminist research: The politics of location, interpretation, and publication. Albany: State University of New York Press.
13.
Lincoln, Y.S. (2004, April). Academic freedom, IRBs and the NRC committee report. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, San Diego, CA.
Marcus, G.E. (1994). What comes (just) after “post”? The case of ethnography. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 563-574). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
McWilliam, E. (1999). Pedagogical pleasures. New York: Peter Lang.
17.
National Institutes of Health. (2004). Certificates of confidentiality: Background information. Retrieved September 20, 2004, from http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/policy/coc/background.htm
18.
National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education (R. J. Shavelson & L. Towne, Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
19.
Nelson, C. (2004). The brave new world of research surveillance. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 207-218.
20.
Rajchman, J. (1991). Philosophical events: Essays of the 80's. New York: Columbia University Press.
21.
Richardson, L. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 923-948). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
Shakeshaft, C. (2004). Educator sexual misconduct: A synthesis of existing literature (ED-02-PO-3281). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
23.
Spivak, G.C. (1993). Outside in the teaching machine. New York: Routledge.
