Back to main page

Informed Consent for Faculty Research Participants

Faculty Informed Consent Form

 

Fielding Graduate University
Informed Consent Form


Study Title: Assessing the Unassessable: Mapping Stakeholder Tensions in the Assessment of AI-Assisted Doctoral Writing


You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Shana Pote, a doctoral student in the School of Leadership Studies at Fielding Graduate University. This study is supervised by Dr. Katrina Rogers. This research explores the tensions felt by students, faculty, and administrators when considering the use of generative AI in producing doctoral work, and is part of Shana Pote's Fielding dissertation research.


Before you agree to participate in this research study, it is important that you read and understand the information provided in this Informed Consent Form. If you have any questions, please ask the researcher for clarification.

 

First, Confirm That You Qualify to Participate:

1.    Are you currently a faculty member (core or adjunct) in School of Leadership Studies or School of Psychology?

Yes - ☐                                 No - ☐

2.    Which school is your primary affiliation?

☐ School of Leadership Studies

☐ School of Psychology

 

3.    Have you advised, taught, or evaluated doctoral students in the past 2 years?

Yes - ☐                           No - ☐

4.    How would you describe your current stance on AI use in doctoral education?

 

☐ Skeptical or concerned

☐ Mixed or undecided

☐ Generally supportive

 

5.    Are you comfortable reviewing anonymized doctoral student writing that you know involved AI use?

Yes - ☐                           No - ☐

 

Why Is This Study Being Done?

This study strives to understand the tensions regarding the use of generative AI in doctoral programs to produce doctoral writing. As generative AI becomes widespread in academic writing, a key question emerges: what's the difference between a student who wrote the words themselves and a student who can defend the ideas regardless of who typed them? This study explores one possible way to get at that question: pairing a student's original paper with a follow-up dialogue, where an AI asks the student to explain and apply the ideas in their own words, and generates an assessment of the student's epistemic ownership based on that dialogue. The study examines how students, faculty, and administrators interpret this combination of paper and dialogue, and what tensions emerge about what counts as legitimate learning, authorship, and rigor when AI is part of the process.


How Many People Will Take Part In The Study?

Approximately 21 participants will take part in this study: 8 students, 8 faculty members, and 5 administrators.


What Is Involved In The Study?

If you agree to participate, you will be asked to:

1. Review anonymized student materials (30-45 minutes, on your own time before the interview):

  • You will receive the student's original written paper
  • You will receive a transcript of a student's question-and-answer session (where an AI chatbot asked the student to explain, defend, and apply ideas from their written work)
  • You will receive an epistemic ownership assessment based on that dialogue, including a final determination of whether ownership was demonstrated
  • These materials are from a doctoral student in the other school (not your own) and have been fully anonymized to protect student identity
  • You will be asked not to attempt to identify the student

2. Participate in an interview (60-75 minutes):

  • You will first be asked about your own general thinking on authorship, epistemic ownership, acceptable AI use, and academic rigor in doctoral work, and about your own experience using AI in your own writing
  • The researcher will then ask about your interpretation of the specific student materials: what the paper, dialogue, and assessment reveal or don't reveal, tensions the case raises, and how your own standards compare to the ones you'd apply to this student
  • The researcher will conduct the interview directly, on camera briefly for introductions and then off camera, communicating by audio; you will be asked to keep your own camera on throughout
  • This interview will be audio/video recorded

Total time commitment: Approximately 90-120 minutes (materials review + interview)


Sample Questions You May Be Asked:

During the interview:

  • "Based on the student's dialogue transcript, what does it reveal about their understanding and ownership of the ideas?"
  • "Does this dialogue format provide adequate evidence for evaluating doctoral-level learning?"
  • "What tensions emerge for you when you think about assessing learning this way?"
  • "If this dialogue convinces you that a student understands their work deeply, does that change how you think about AI assistance in the writing process?"
  • "What operational or policy considerations would arise if this type of assessment were implemented?"


What Are The Risks Of The Study?

There are minimal risks associated with this study:

  • Mild discomfort: You may experience mild discomfort while reflecting on tensions or contradictions in your own beliefs about assessment, learning, or AI use in academia. You may skip any question you do not wish to answer and may stop the interview at any time.
  • Time commitment: The materials review and interview require approximately 90-120 minutes total, which may conflict with your professional obligations.
  • Potential for inadvertent student identification: Although materials are anonymized and from the other school, there is a small possibility you might recognize details. You will be asked not to attempt identification and to keep any such information confidential.


What Are The Benefits To Taking Part In This Study?

You may gain professional insight into how AI is reshaping questions of authorship, epistemic ownership, and rigor in doctoral education, and a chance to reflect on your own assumptions alongside a real case. Your perspective will help inform how doctoral programs might approach the assessment of AI-assisted work, contributing to the field's understanding of these tensions. There are no direct professional benefits.


What About Confidentiality and Protection?

Your identity will be known to the researcher but will not be published or disclosed. The following measures will be taken to protect your information:

  • Anonymization: Your name and identifying details will be removed from all reports and publications. You will be identified only by role (e.g., "faculty participant" or "administrator participant").
  • Data security:
  • Audio/video recordings will be stored securely on password-protected, encrypted devices
  • Only the researcher and approved interrater research assistants will have access to recordings
  • All transcripts and coded data will be stored on password-protected and encrypted devices
  • Data retention: Data will be retained for 3 years after study completion and then permanently deleted
  • Publications: Fielding Graduate University will not be named as the research site in publications or presentations; it will be described as "a distributed doctoral-granting university" instead. Individual participants will never be identified. Direct quotes from participants may be used but will remain anonymous.
  • IRB access: The Institutional Review Board of Fielding Graduate University retains the right to access the signed informed consent forms and other study documents.
  • Student materials: The student materials you review have been anonymized and are from the other school (not your own) to protect student identity. You are asked not to attempt to identify the student and to keep all information confidential.
  • By participating in this study, you agree to these privacy and confidentiality measures. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the principal researcher or the Fielding Graduate University IRB.


Participation In Research Is Voluntary

You may decline to participate or to withdraw from this study at any time, either during or after your participation, without negative consequences to your professional standing or relationship with Fielding Graduate University. Should you withdraw, your data will be eliminated from the study and will be destroyed.

The researcher is also free to terminate the study at any time.


Compensation

No compensation will be provided for participation in this study. Participation is entirely voluntary.


Study Results

You may request a copy of the summary of the aggregate final results by indicating your interest at the end of this form.


Additional Information

Important clarification: This is a research study, not a pilot implementation or feasibility assessment. You are not being asked to evaluate whether a system should be adopted or to make institutional recommendations. The focus is on understanding tensions and assumptions that emerge when interpreting dialogue-based evidence of learning when AI has been involved in producing the original written work.


If you have any questions about any aspect of this study or your involvement, please contact the researcher or supervising faculty before signing this form. Contact information is provided below.


You may also ask questions at any time during your participation in this study.


If you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant, contact the Fielding Graduate University IRB by email at irb@fielding.edu or by telephone at 805-898-4034.



Faculty Informed Consent