In 2001 the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) put forth guidelines for the ethical treatment of students during research in composition studies, and several scholars have voiced their fears and opinions. This paper cautions that the Guidelines' reliance on Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to protect students may unintentionally preclude publication of the kinds of research teachers in a 2-year institution find most productive. According to the paper, the Guidelines could negatively impact teacher/researchers situated in an institution where no IRB exists--adherence to legal permissions is particularly troubling for teacher/researchers in two-year and four-year institutions without IRBs. The paper describes the often different procedures in place from campus to campus, and the difficulty of reconciling them. It contends that the latitude required of professionals to respond to complex, individual situations involving the use of student writing is severely limited by the Guidelines' emphasis on IRBs. It also notes that the National Bioethics Advisory Committee recommendations for changes in rules involving human subjects make clear that IRBs are primarily focused on principles and procedures in biomedical and research sciences, whose research with human subjects is more clearly distinguished from textual research. The paper calls for a revision of NCTE's Guidelines. (Contains 11 references.) (NKA)