Child Assent Practices in Research: Improving Ethics, Decision-Making, and Inclusivity
Saved in:
| Title: | Child Assent Practices in Research: Improving Ethics, Decision-Making, and Inclusivity |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | David C. Coker (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Educational Research and Practice. 2025 15. |
| Availability: | Walden University, LLC. 100 Washington Avenue South Suite 900, Minneapolis, MN 55401. Tel: 800-925-3368; Fax: 612-338-5092; e-mail: JERAP@waldenu.edu; Web site: http://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/jerap |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 24 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Children, Youth, Informed Consent, Ethics, Research Problems, Research Administration, Educational Research, Research Design, Participation, Personal Autonomy, Empowerment, Doctoral Dissertations, Risk |
| ISSN: | 2167-8693 |
| Abstract: | The following article addresses a conundrum: What if child assent in research were a fully informed, standalone process that empowered all children to discuss meaningfully, negotiate, and decide how and what the research experience would look like? Past research and practices suggest that child assent, when children (youths to 17-year-olds who have not been emancipated) agree to participate in research before, during, and after parents' or guardians' consent, is rife with problems that minimize informed participation and prize procedural ethics over true understanding of the processes and autonomous decision-making. Academic articles often lack details, as length requirements and brevity preclude detailed explanations. Using a thematic analysis of dissertations on education in the United States, a key finding was that child assent was largely taken for granted, an approach that systematically excluded children with disabilities. Recommendations to improve the process include prescreening, an individualized child assent protocol, and, if needed in situations with more than minimal risk, frequent interaction with institutional review boards. These practices will move child assent procedures beyond questionable practice and toward empowering children and including all children from different backgrounds and experiences. A checklist provides a systematic way to develop child assent practices in an optimal manner. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1492202 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | The following article addresses a conundrum: What if child assent in research were a fully informed, standalone process that empowered all children to discuss meaningfully, negotiate, and decide how and what the research experience would look like? Past research and practices suggest that child assent, when children (youths to 17-year-olds who have not been emancipated) agree to participate in research before, during, and after parents' or guardians' consent, is rife with problems that minimize informed participation and prize procedural ethics over true understanding of the processes and autonomous decision-making. Academic articles often lack details, as length requirements and brevity preclude detailed explanations. Using a thematic analysis of dissertations on education in the United States, a key finding was that child assent was largely taken for granted, an approach that systematically excluded children with disabilities. Recommendations to improve the process include prescreening, an individualized child assent protocol, and, if needed in situations with more than minimal risk, frequent interaction with institutional review boards. These practices will move child assent procedures beyond questionable practice and toward empowering children and including all children from different backgrounds and experiences. A checklist provides a systematic way to develop child assent practices in an optimal manner. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2167-8693 |
