Class‑Based research with students

Use this guide when planning or submitting a project that may involve students as participants and in managing undue influence.

A) Study design (Belmont principles grounding)

• Respect for Persons: Participation is voluntary; students have sufficient information and can participate/decline/withdraw without penalty or academic impact. Safeguards are in place when power differentials exist (e.g., instructor-student relationships).
• Beneficence: Risks are minimized and communicated (including privacy/confidentiality provisions) and proportionate to anticipated benefit of the research.
• Justice: Ensure fair and equitable subject selection. Students are recruited based on scientific/educational rationale and not merely for convenience or accessibility.

Managing undue influence when the instructor is also the researcher

Student participation in research is common on university campuses. Of particular concern is the possibility that students may feel pressure to participate in research. Students may feel they must volunteer to participate to win favor with an instructor (e.g., participating in research may lead to a better grade or a letter of recommendation, etc.). Students may also feel that if they choose not to participate, it will negatively impact their relationship with faculty or their standing in class.

Why this matters: There is an inherent power differential between students and instructors, and anyone with instructional or grading authority (faculty, instructors, TAs, supervisors) can unintentionally create real or perceived pressure to participate. Therefore, it is not considered best practice to conduct research on one’s own students and appropriate protections must be in place if it occurs.

B) Undue influence safeguards (instructor = researcher)

• Risk level: If proposing to enroll your own students, the study is no more than minimal risk.
• Independent recruitment: Recruitment is conducted indirectly or by an independent third party.
  • Flyers posted broadly or in other classes (not targeted to your enrolled students)
  • Program/department-wide announcements (not targeted)
  • Third party recruits and answers questions
• Independent consent: Consent is obtained by a person not involved in teaching/grading.
  • Note: a TA or anyone involved in course activities/grading is not independent.
• Instructor blinding: You will not know who participated during the course.
  • Third party manages identifiers/code key
  • Identifiable data are not accessible and analysis occurs after final grades are posted

C) Credit / extra credit (if offered)

• Students are not required to participate in a specific study for credit.
• A comparable alternative is provided (similar time, effort, and educational benefit).
• Alternatives are not graded for content (completion/attendance only when feasible).
• Withdrawal is allowed at any time without loss of credit.

D) Classroom / group work / recordings

• If group work or recordings are involved, you have a plan for non‑consent.
• Each student’s consent is obtained to use group data for research.
• If one student does not consent and their data cannot be excluded, the group data will not be used for research.

E) Curriculum‑wide research

• Up‑front disclosure is provided about the study and planned data use (e.g., Syllabi).
• Consent to use identifiable course artifacts/data is obtained.
• Only data from students who consent to research use are analyzed and after grades are entered.

F) Informed consent (process & form information)

• Participation is voluntary; declining has no effect on grades, evaluation, standing, or relationships.
• Withdrawal is allowed at any time without penalty (including no loss of credit, if applicable).
• Describe how instructor blinding will occur and when (if ever) identifiable data will be accessible.
• Describe confidentiality protections and limits (especially for group settings/recordings).
• Identify exactly what activity and/or information will be used for research purposes (e.g., surveys, assignments, exams, recordings) and where they will occur (e.g., outside of class).

G) FERPA check (education records / course artifacts) *See FERPA addendum for additional information

• Determine whether you will access identifiable education records (grades, evaluations, rosters, maintained assignments/papers).
• If identifiable education records/course artifacts are involved:
  • Student written permission will be obtained,
  • Institutional FERPA documentation/verification will be included (per institutional Associate Registrar consultation process).
• De‑identify/aggregate data when possible; limit access to authorized personnel (e.g., Canvas, email recruitment).

H) IRB application—identify research activities & safeguards

• Recruitment/Consent: Who/how recruits/consents; how independence is maintained.
• Procedures: What students do; when; where; and how non‑participants are handled.
• Data Management: Blinding, coding, storage, access controls, and timing relative to grading.
• Attachments: Recruitment scripts, consent forms, activity materials, FERPA and permission documentation, as applicable (e.g., Chair, Associate Registrar, School District, Principal, etc.).

FERPA addendum

FERPA and technology neutrality

• FERPA is technology neutral and permits student consent to be obtained electronically or through traditional paper-based methods.
• The method used to obtain consent must reasonably authenticate the identity of the student and preserve evidence of the student’s authorization.
• Electronic consent is permissible only when the institution can demonstrate that the student providing the authorization is the student whose records are being disclosed.

Online research, QR codes, and qualtrics

• When student consent is collected electronically, the authorization process must occur through an approved authentication method that verifies the student’s identity before consent is provided.
• Accessing a consent form through a QR code or survey link alone does not constitute authentication of the student’s identity.
• If Qualtrics or another online platform is used to collect FERPA consent, the consent process should be integrated with Central Authentication Service (CAS) or another university-approved authentication mechanism at the point of authorization.
• Distribution of a consent link to a student’s NAU email address, by itself, is not sufficient evidence that the student completing the authorization is the student whose records are the subject of the disclosure.

NAU FERPA authentication requirements

For purposes of FERPA authorization, acceptable methods of authentication include:

• A written authorization bearing the student’s original (“wet”) signature.
• Electronic authorization obtained through a university-approved authentication method, such as NAU’s Central Authentication Service (CAS).
• Communications originating from the student’s authenticated NAU account when institutional processes recognize such communications as a verified means of identity validation.

The institution must be able to demonstrate that the authentication method used provides reasonable assurance that the authorization was submitted by the student.

Authorized personnel

• Authorized personnel are university employees or officials who require access to education records in order to perform their assigned institutional responsibilities.
• Access to student information must be limited to individuals with a legitimate educational interest as defined by FERPA and applicable university policy.
• Access to student records for research purposes must be limited to personnel who have been approved for the project, have received student consent or deidentified data, and whose responsibilities require access to the information.
• Authorized personnel are responsible for protecting the confidentiality and security of any student information obtained during the course of their work or research activities.

Records and data obtained from external institutions

• Student records obtained from other educational institutions remain subject to FERPA and any applicable requirements imposed by the originating institution.
• External institutions may establish additional restrictions regarding what information may be disclosed, who may receive it, and the methods by which it may be transmitted or stored.
• Researchers and university personnel must comply with all applicable FERPA requirements, data-sharing agreements, and conditions established by the originating institution.
• Although records originating from another institution may not fall under NAU’s direct ownership or governance, FERPA obligations continue to apply to the handling and protection of those records.
• As a best practice, data received from external institutions should be managed in accordance with applicable NAU data security, privacy, and records management requirements.

Documentation and record retention

• Documentation of student authorization must be retained in accordance with applicable university records retention requirements and any project-specific requirements established by the Institutional Review Board (IRB).
• Electronic records of authentication, consent, and disclosure should be maintained in a manner that allows the institution to demonstrate compliance with FERPA if requested.