J

lots of loose ends and ideas floated.

some serious concerns about the future where raised by Stephanie Perrin.

can you guys see the back board?

I will try from memory to explain.

from my perspective

stef

stef

the following is from Simon Frazier University…

some of the things we touched upon requires a second workshop, now that the topics have been introduced…I mean, steve really gets assaulted with some of his reflectionism.

We should probably do some of this work in the context of theatre rather than real world work given some of the risks with college students, or visually impaired persons. In fact, as Professor Smith rightfully pointed out, it would be irresponsible to place an eyetap upon a visually impaired person in a drug infested neiborhood. some of the ideas may just come in over the press like alex suggested.

Risk Analysis

7.1 Researchers should assess all reasonably foreseeable risks involved in, and benefits expected to arise from research projects. Researchers involved in greater than minimal risk research projects should be prepared to document reasonably foreseeable risks and benefits.
7.2 Researchers should employ methods that avoid or reduce possible risks, and maximize benefits in keeping with disciplinary and epistemological norms and standards.

7.3 Researchers should consider possibilities that exist with respect to possible:

physical harm,

psychological harm,

injury to reputation or privacy,

breach of any relevant law.

7.4 Researchers should consider not only the likelihood of a given risk, but also parameters such as its duration and the likely reversibility of its impact should it materialize.
7.5 Benefits include specific advantages to subjects, to third parties, or to society or a segment thereof, and any general increase in human knowledge. Benefits may arise from advantages or increases in knowledge that are actively sought by the researcher or as by-products of the research (e.g., serendipitous events).

7.6 In projects involving more than minimal risk it is the responsibility of both researchers and the Research Ethics Board to balance risks and benefits. Projected benefits should outweigh reasonably foreseeable risks. With regard to non-minimal risk, the more incalculable the risks or the less tangible the benefits, the more cautious must researchers and the Research Ethics Board be.