Tracy (2010, pp. 846-848) divides the ethical process into four parts, these being procedural ethics (which refers to ethical actions dictated as universally necessary by larger organisations, institutions or governing bodies), situational and culturally specific ethics (which refer to the ethical practices that emerge from a reasoned consideration of a context’s specific circumstances), relational ethics (which involves an ethical self-consciousness in which researchers are mindful of their character, actions and consequences on others), and exiting ethics (which are concerned with how the ethical considerations continue beyond the data collection phase to the manner in which researchers leave the scene and share the results).
When I was first thinking about doing my EdD thesis, one of my fears was that of involving children in my research. This was for two main reasons. Firstly, for my B.Ed. and M.Ed. dissertation research, I involved child participants on whose behalf I had to undergo challenging ethical processes to ensure their safety and protection at all times. McNamara (2013, p. 141) states that the challenges faced by researchers still include the over-zealous gate-keeping by ethicists, other professionals, and sometimes even parents/caregivers. With regard to the procedural ethics and the work carried out in my ethics application, I was very much concerned when I was writing my application to the University of Sheffield Ethics Board and the Ministry for Education and Employment in Malta. These applications can be found in the Appendices section listed as Appendix 1 and Appendix 2.
I wanted to send a clear message to the reviewers of my ethics application, for which purpose I included a vast range of information to render my thoughts on my research and the ethical process to follow understandable and unambiguous. The process that I considered when writing my ethics application and which I used in my research was the following:
- I reflected on the aims and research questions of my research. - I reflected on the participants who were taking part in the research.
- As my research was going to involve children, I made sure that both my colleague and I established a good, trusting relationship with the children.
- I observed the children who could benefit from the approach I had adopted, as I believed that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to listening to the voice of the child.
- I planned the research consent letters for parents in both Maltese and English (Appendices 3 & 4).
- I planned the research assent letters for children in Maltese and English, making sure that these were child-friendly and age appropriate (Appendices 5 & 6). - I planned the research consent letter for my colleague (Appendix 7).
- I prepared the consent and assent letters and forms to submit to the University of Sheffield Ethics Board. I also handed in the consent and assent letters and forms to the Ethics Board at the Ministry for Education and Employment in Malta. (Appendices 1 & 2)
When I sent the ethics application to the University of Sheffield Board of Ethics, I was required to make a number of amendments. Focusing on these changes led me to realise that this process had made me reflect more on the research process, and had also helped me ease my researcher’s concerns with regard to ethics. After focusing on the procedural ethics in my research, I proceeded to work on the situational and culturally specific ethics component. Although this was a simple procedure, as I had direct experience of the situation and culture I was going to do my research in, I felt that from this part of my research onwards, I had to safeguard my participants. The first way in which I did this was by changing all the names of the participants (the names of all the child participants and the name of my colleague). Additionally I was aware that since I
was conducting my research in Malta – a small country, I felt that it would be best to also change the name of the school where I taught at the time. When the participants spoke about specific people, I also made sure to change the latter’s names to protect the children further. Although not all the children who attended the nurture group were chosen to participate in the study, I did not want the readers of my thesis to surmise the identity of the six child participants.
Although I had already spoken with Philippa, the nurture group learning support assistant I was to work with in my research, I held a meeting with her to explain the aims of the study once I had received ethical clearance. During this meeting, which was held on the 29th of September 2015, I also explained anonymity and confidentiality issues, as well as why I was carrying out this study. Philippa was free to decide whether or not to participate in this research. I also explained to her that the role she needed to take in the study was to build a conversation with the child participants about their journal writing and/or drawing. That way she could try to understand what the child had drawn and/or had written about.
I then set up individual meetings with the parents of the children, with the term parent implying the adult who was a primary caregiver and had legal custody of the participant child. The meetings with the parents were held between the 6th and 9th of October 2015. I explained to the parents that they could choose not to give their consent for their children’s participation in the research. However, once I had explained the nature and purposes of my study, the parents of all six children gave their consent. I assigned to them the information and consent letters in Maltese, as they felt more comfortable with the Maltese version of each document (Appendix 4).
I then met up with the children, during which exchanges a member of the school senior management team would be present. These meetings were held between the 6th and 12th of October 2015, and all took place within the nurture group. This had been planned to enable the children to feel comfortable and more at ease in a familiar setup. I invited a member of the senior management team to be present during the meetings to
ensure that I explained myself in a way that the children could understand the aims of the study, anonymity and confidentiality issues, and why I was doing my research. I emphasised that the children were free to choose whether to take part in the research or otherwise, and that it was also possible for them to stop attending the sessions during the course of the research. As I was preparing and conducting my research with children, two main issues were kept in mind. These included the issues of assent and consent as well as the question of how fundamental the children’s participation was in this research.
McNamara (2013, p. 141) states that it is important to differentiate between assent and
consent in inclusive, participatory and empowering research with children. I deemed it
important to necessitate that even if the parent had given their consent for their child to participate in the research, if for some reason the child did not wish to do so at the beginning or during the course of the research, the latter could opt out at any point in time. As I previously stated, I chose the six children on the basis of their enjoyment of the journal writing and/or drawing activity during the nurture group sessions. I could observe that such activity appeared to help them open up more. During the meeting with each individual child, all six children said that they wanted to participate in the research.
Initially, two of the children could not comprehend why they needed to change their name. However, after further explanation, they understood the reason behind the name change and each suggested another name I could use to refer to them in my research. Another point discussed during the meetings with the children was that if the children were to choose not to take part in the research, they could still come to the nurture group, where both Philippa and I would still be there for them regardless of whether or not they wished to participate. All the children were eager to participate, and three of the children even mentioned that they felt special about being involved in this research. I also mentioned twice if later on they decided not to continue the journal writing activity, this would bear no consequences whatsoever. Five out of the six children wanted their information and consent letters in Maltese, whilst one child preferred the
English versions. Up until the end of the research, none of the children expressed a wish to opt out.
I feel that I tried to be ethically correct with regard to relational and situational ethics by first observing and reflecting on the context and setting I was working in. Apart from the University of Sheffield’s ethical clearance, I sought ethical clearance from the Research Department within the Maltese Ministry of Education, as I felt that this department would be more aware of the research situation and context in question. Most of the child participants and their parents communicated with me in Maltese during the research. One participant used English to reply to my questions about her drawings and/or writings. Another participant code-switched between Maltese and English. The other four children showed a preference for speaking Maltese. I got to know which language the children preferred to speak to me in, initially through observing which language they chose to communicate with me in prior to the research.
Once the research was underway, I would take note of each child’s language of preference when in conversation with me, and employed that same language in my exchanges. With regard to exiting research, I felt that it was important to speak to the participants and their parents when the research period was nearly over. When the children attended their last nurture group session before the Christmas holidays, I spoke to each participant individually, informing them that this would be their last journal entry to be interpreted in my research. Knowing how much the children perceived journal writing and/or drawing as a listening process, they were reassured that they would still be able to write and/or draw in their diary, and to speak to either Philippa or myself, even though the diary entries would no longer form part of my research. I felt that in this particular way I could still listen to the unheard voices of the children, and at the same time encourage them to continue to use journal writing and/or drawing as a listening tool. I also held a meeting with the parents of each child on the 11th of December 2015.