Vision, Passion, Action

Call for Papers

The Centre for Interdisciplinary Research on Narrative at St. Thomas University has issued a call for papers for its upcoming conference, Narrative Matters 2010 - Exploring the Narrative Landscape: Issues, Investigations, and Interventions. Click here for details.

Research ethics protocols


Regarding Ethics Review Protocols (Human Subjects Review)

In North America and Europe, there has been a significant shift since the 1970’s in how academic researchers are monitored with respect to ethical practices. Whereas this task was once the responsibility of professional associations in each discipline, it has now become a function of each university through one or more Ethics Review Committees. (In the United States, these are known as IRB’s or Institutional Review Boards.) In Canada, the work of these committee is guided by a national policy (the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans).  Before they can be implemented, all funded studies involving “contact with human subjects” must have a written Ethics Review Protocol that responds to a standard set of questions established by the Committee. Producing these Protocols and having them approved is part of the background work of managing a study. It is also a serious piece of intellectual work given that the assumptions shaping the Protocol Guidelines – its view of what constitutes “proper” science – are sometimes at odds with the theoretical or methodological approach of the researcher/s. At the Institute for Disability Studies Research and Education, we have been writing successful Ethics Review Protocols for disability research since 2002. We have posted a number of our protocols (approved!) on this website. They address assumptions in the Guidelines that are problematic from a disability standpoint – for example, the re-inscription of “special” and/or “vulnerable populations.” We post them because we believe that it is politically important to share ways of thinking and writing about Ethics Protocols that enable innovative research even as they meet regulatory standards. Feel free to “borrow” ideas, practices and phrasings from the Protocols we have posted. But recognize as well that, like published articles and books, they are the intellectual property of their authors. If you borrow from them, please cite the Protocol in your references (use our URL as your source); and please indicate in the usual ways any direct quotes that you have drawn from the text.

Ethics Protocol For "Artwork", Catherine Frazee, Principal Investigator; Alan Shain, Research Assistant.
This is a pilot study undertaken in preparation for a larger study investigating the contribution of disabled people to contemporary arts and culture in Canada. Our hope is to chronicle the work of disabled writers, artists and performers in seeking access to audiences, environments and creative opportunities and to explore the dynamic process of creative work that challenges, complicates or confronts the dominant lexicon of disability representation...

Ethics Protocol For "Into And Out Of The Closet: Discovering The Lifeworlds Of Disabled Women Through Their Clothing"
Whether in Body, Dress, Disability or Women’s Studies, researchers have generally failed to engage disabled women in conversation about the social significance of their clothing. “Into and Out of the Closet” addresses this oversight through an innovative fusion of ethnographic and arts-informed methods. Dubbed the Wardrobe Study, this is a three-year project that seeks to discover the lifeworlds of disabled women through their clothing practice/s.

Activist Disability History In The Museum: How Do Visitors Respond?
Activist Disability History in the Museum is a study of visitor responses to Out from Under beginning at the Royal Ontario Museum but anticipating the exhibit’s movement to other locations and venues in Canada. What is it like to engage with a transgressive portrait of disability history? How might transgressive readings of history assist us in re-imagining exhibit-visitor relations? What actually transpires in the process of exhibit-visitor exchange? And how might such encounters inform our larger curiosity about audience responses to disability arts/culture more broadly?