Research Ethics Board

• Red Deer Polytechnic (faculty, staff, student) researchers who plan to conduct research with human participants internal or external to the institution
• Researchers external to Red Deer Polytechnic who plan to recruit human participants at Red Deer Polytechnic
• Research that involves the review of records not normally available to the public
• Research that involves observational methods (virtual or otherwise)  
• Course-based student projects, when information is collected from non-course members and information will be analyzed, summarized, and disseminated
• Research projects previously approved by another institution that will involve recruiting participants from the Red Deer Polytechnic community  

The Research Ethics Board only considers research involving human participants. If you are considering animal research, please refer to the information regarding teaching and research with animals at Red Deer Polytechnic. 

• Program evaluation, quality assurance studies and performance reviews
• Testing within normal educational requirements when used exclusively for assessment, management or improvement purposes
• Collecting information from authorized personnel to release information or data in the ordinary course of their employment about organizations, policies, procedures, professional practices or statistical reports
• Information legally accessible to the public with no reasonable expectation of privacy
• Observation of people in public places or online when there is no interaction or intervention involved by the researcher, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, AND dissemination of research results does not allow identification of individuals
• Secondary use of anonymous information when research data does not lead to identifiable information if linked with other data
• Interpretation of a work or works of art by an artist, and the study of how a work of art is generated
• Research about a living individual involved in the public arena based exclusively on publicly available information

Please consult the REB if you have questions about whether your planned activity requires REB approval. 

Class assignments where students will collect and analyze data from human participants must also obtain ethical clearance. Each student's project does not need to be reviewed by the Research Ethics Board. Only the assignment is reviewed, and the instructor then provides ethical oversight for each student's project.

You'll need a REB review if any of the following apply to your research:  

• The intent is to educate students on research processes used to explore and expand existing theories and conceptual knowledge
• Students compare effectiveness of new techniques, practices, programs with standard approaches
• Primary data is collected and organized for analysis and distribution (orally or written)
• Data is collected from persons who are not members of the course
• Data is collected from a vulnerable population (e.g. vulnerable ethnic communities or individuals, children, cognitively challenged individuals, “captive” groups)

The Tri-Council Policy Statement defines minimal risk as “If potential participants can reasonably be expected to regard the probability and magnitude of possible harms implied by participation in the research to be no greater than those encountered by the subject in those aspects of his or her everyday life that relate to the research, then the research can be regarded as within the range of minimal risk.” 

Generally, minimal risk research does not:

• Involve vulnerable participants or groups of people without sufficient and respectful protocols for securing consent
• Involve sensitive or incriminating topics or questions
• Manipulate the behaviour of participants beyond the range of normal activity
• Involve physically invasive contact with the participants
• Involve undue or excessive rewards for participation 

If the proposed project represents more than minimal risk, then the instructor will be required to complete the full research ethics application process.

Student information gathering activities are classified as skill development and, therefore, not “research”, when the intent is to:

• Use the information to provide advice, diagnosis, identification of appropriate interventions, general advice for a client
• Develop skills which are considered standard practice within a profession (e.g. observation, assessment, intervention, evaluation, auditing)
• Collect information as part of the normal relationship between a student and the ‘participants’ (e.g. classroom teacher and students; nurse and patient; lawyer and client)
• Teach the design, conduct and process of research (e.g. ‘practice’ data collection from students within their class)

Please consult with the REB if you have any questions about whether or not your planned activity requires REB approval. 

There are various situations when research involving humans requires the involvement of multiple institutions and/or multiple Research Ethics Boards.  This includes, but is not limited to, the following situations;

• a team of researchers affiliated with different institutions;
• several research projects affiliated with different institutions, with data combined at some point to form one overall research project;
• a researcher affiliated with one institution, but that involves collecting data or recruiting participants at different institutions;
• a researcher who has multiple institutional affiliations (e.g., two universities, a university and a college, or a university and a hospital. See Application of Article 6.1);
• a researcher at one institution that requires the limited collaboration of individuals affiliated with different institutions or organizations (e.g., statisticians, lab or X-ray technicians, social workers and schoolteachers); or
• researcher(s) working under the auspices of a Canadian research institution conduct in another province, territory or country.

(Chapter 8 - Tri-Council Policy Statement 2 (2022)

When another Canadian, TCPS-bound Research Ethics Board has approved a minimal risk research project, it may be eligible for a modified review process at RDP.  Below are some of the different scenarios for multiple jurisdiction research and an outline of the review process.

Note: this applies to minimal risk research only

If RDP faculty, students, and/or staff are being recruited as participants in minimal risk research, the proposed research will undergo a Chair Review. The Principal Investigator (PI) must submit the following:

• External Researcher / Multi-Site Research Form.
• All recruitment and consent documents used.
• A copy of certificate / approval documentation from the PI’s institution.
  • If the PI’s institution is not TCPS2 compliant, this process does not apply; the PI must apply for a regular REB review from RDP.

The REB reserves the right to request further documents related to the research and to request that the submitting party use Red Deer Polytechnic REB forms.

Note: this applies to minimal risk research only

RDP researchers conducting research at other Canadian PSIs are responsible for inquiring as to the requirements for REB review at those sites. They will be required to submit this information the Red Deer Polytechnic REB as part of their Project Application form. 

Note: this applies to minimal risk research only

Red Deer Polytechnic Researcher as Principal Investigator (PI)

The Research Ethics Board (REB) must review all research conducted by its faculty, students, and staff members when they are the PI. Collaborating researchers must consult with their REBs to determine if they are required to apply to their own institutions. The RDP REB reserves the right to impose the condition that Co-Investigators secure REB approval from their own institutions. If data will be collected from other Canadian post-secondary institutions, the PI is responsible for inquiring as to the requirements for REB review at all these other sites and provide this information for the RDP REB review.

Principal Investigator (PI) from Another Institution, Red Deer Polytechnic Co-Investigators

When the research project has a PI from another Canadian institution and that institution’s REB has approved the project, a Chair Review will be conducted. The following must be submitted:

• A Multi-Site Research Form, completed by the PI; any RDP researchers will also be named on the Form
• All approved research materials (e.g., recruitment materials, consent documents, surveys, interview questions, etc) (if RDP participants will be recruited)
• A copy of certificate / approval from the institution that has conducted the initial review.  
  • If the PI’s institution is not TCPS2 compliant, this modified review process does not apply; the PI must apply for a regular REB review from Red Deer Polytechnic.
• TCPS2 CORE Certificates for all Red Deer Polytechnic researchers

The Form and supporting documents are to be submitted by email to the REB. If the research involves a Red Deer Polytechnic researcher, they may submit the forms on behalf of the PI. The REB reserves the right to request further documents related to the research and to request that the submitting party use Red Deer Polytechnic REB forms.

Note: this applies to minimal risk research only

When conducting research required for the completion of a degree at another Canadian PSI, normally that institution’s REB will be the Board of Record for the research. In some situations, however, a regular review or a Chair review by the RDP REB will be required - for instance, when the research involves the RDP students as participants (dual-role research) or when the researcher is representing themselves as an employee of RDP to participants.

• Reiko Yeap, Chair (Psychology, School of Arts & Education)
• Greg Wells, Vice-Chair (Psychology, School of Arts & Education)
• Krista Robson, Past Chair (Sociology, School of Arts & Education)
• Dustin Quirk (Business, Donald School of Business, Science & Computing)
• Talitha Klym (Social Work, Donald School of Business, Science & Technology)
• Sona Macnaughton (Library, Division of Student Success)
• Daniel Haas (Philosophy, School of Arts & Education)
• Robert Opoku (Business, Donald School of Business, Science & Computing)
• Wesley Maciejewski (Mathematics, Donald School of Business, Science & Computing)
• Celina Cloarec (Student Representative, Psychology, School of Arts & Education)
• Bobbi Ferguson (Student Representative, Education, School of Arts & Education)
• Sam Darby (Student Representative, Psychology, School of Arts & Education)
• Irene Wenger (Olds College of Agriculture & Technology)
• Community member Representative 1
• Community member Representative 2

Terms of Reference

• Krista Robson, Chair (Sociology) 
• Reiko Yeap, Vice-Chair (Psychology)
• Greg Wells, Vice-Chair (Psychology)
• Jones Adjei (Sociology)
• Dustin Quirk (Business)
• Talitha Klym (Social Work)
• Sona Macnaughton (Library)
• Ashley Larsen-Stewart (Student)
• Celina Cloarec (Student)
• Lauryn Dumont (Student)
• Raye St. Denys (Community Member)
• Irene Wenger (Olds College of Agriculture & Technology) 
• Brenda Query (Nursing)

Terms of Reference