Lessons from the IRB

After having a dramatic experience with finishing my IRB proposal, I feel it adequate to talk about my experience. In short, I have to thank the IRB for their strict requirement because it caused me to better develop my project and learn a valuable lesson on revision.

Let me give a quick overview of my experiences in the last week. After much compiling of my annotated sources, researching effective methodology, constructing my own methods, and filtering through all the risks and ethics of my project, I managed to compile a rough draft. That draft was then revised and then critiqued Friday during class. After a few hours of personal revision, I deemed it ready for submission.  Shortly after that personal conclusion, I received a call from my mother about the many spelling and grammar errors in my proposal. Thanks to a loving parent and a ninety minute speaker phone conversation, my proposal was revised and corrected.   It was then emailed to my professors who graciously responded with much constructive criticism. David Williams critiqued my data analysis and provided me with resources to study and to improve it. Erin Whiting met with me for about forty-five minutes as she walked me though some needed corrections in harmonizing my question and background information. After a few more hours of correction and applying the received advice, the proposal was ready for one last revision by Erin Whiting and then for submitted.

I wanted to explain this process because it taught me a valuable lesson. Revision! Revision! Revision! Up until now, my concept of a final draft was “the second draft.” Professor Whiting eased my frustration as she explained that some of her papers had required up to sixty revisions or drafts. This concept is vital to research. Quality research is meaningless unless it can be presented clearly.  The need for the skill of communication hit me unexpectedly hard this week, but I am excited that this field study will be great opportunity to develop that skill.