The consent letters played a different role with the students; a role that was perhaps more of a barrier than a clarification, as in the situation with the instructors. Informed consent is not a simple procedural activity and "requires analysis as much as what are routinely and easily considered as 'data'" (Fine, Weis, Wessen & Wong, 2000, p. 113). The first letter altered the relationship of support, trust, and collegiality that existed between the students and me. I am under no misconception that I am seen as one of the students; I am fully aware that I am seen in a position of power, and in a vastly different socioeconomic group. But our occasional jokes and conversations about shared events helped to connect us a little. The consent letter then seemed to distance us. Even more worrisome, was the perception that the letter suggested I mistrusted a simple verbal agreement. It signified that verbal consent between people who are familiar with each other was not adequate in this situation. When the second letter was presented, instead of compounding their original perceptions, it may have served to alleviate and change their initial perceptions. The second letter was signed quickly by the students. In addition, they didn't want me to read it to them and had no questions about it, unlike the first letter. With the second letter, they may have viewed it as yet another procedural matter. The issue of informed consent and the presentation of the consent form became more of an issue (mostly for me) than I had anticipated.

Reciprocity

As a researcher, I took from the participants: I took their actions, their words, and private thoughts, and re–presented them in a format that I now claim to be mine. What was appropriate to return to them? For some, the opportunity to participate in a study was novel and possibly considered worthwhile in its own right; I listened attentively to their opinions and gave voice to ideas that are rarely heard. I had considered paying the participants for their time, but this seemed inappropriate and could have caused offence. I knew all of the participants and saw them regularly. I had the feeling that they were willing to participate simply because I had asked, and because they wanted to help me. A financial transaction may have belittled their genuine willingness to offer assistance. True reciprocity in this case would be returning my time and myself because that is what I took. At the end of the study, I hosted a luncheon for all of the participants. In addition, I have begun developing a resource, based on the study's findings and discussion, that instructors can use with their students to help them reflect on their learning, their goals, and the personal changes that they are striving to achieve.