Ethics in Educational Research on School Advisory Programs

Introduction to Ethics in Educational Research

Ethics comprises an intricate set of principles, moral standards, and institutional guidelines that regulate scientific activity. Educational and social researchers occasionally face complex challenges when they encounter a conflict between their legal and moral responsibility to protect research participants on one hand, and the need to maintain the standards, quality, and significance of their research on the other. Although a research design or its findings are not always constrained or compromised by ethical principles — and at times ethics actually enhance research quality — the tension between these demands is real. Additionally, researchers "bear a special responsibility for protecting the interests of vulnerable groups throughout the research process" (Tangen, 2014, p. 678).

Educational practitioners have long recognized the weighty value of education and the fact that its quality rests on ethical standards. The awareness of educational researchers regarding the ethical dimensions of their work is increasing steadily. The standard of research and research ethics are grounded in broad social values; they therefore encompass not only internal concerns — such as validity, quality, and responsibility for participant protection within the scientific community — but also external matters, such as the practical significance of research and its utility and relevance to policy-making. The researcher is therefore never fully removed from political and practical contexts, nor from overall ethical responsibility (Tangen, 2014, p. 679).

Research ethics can be divided into three areas: (1) ethical codes practiced within the research community; (2) the relevance and significance of educational research in society; and (3) responsibility for the protection of research participants. Key ethical values such as freedom to research, integrity, sound research practice, professional honesty, and respect for students and colleagues — qualities often regarded as central to the research process and its findings — fall under area (1). The duty to protect participants from harm, and to respect their human welfare and autonomy (including their self-determination, honesty, and liberty), are the dominant values addressed under area (2). This includes attention to potential risks as well as potential benefits for participants and their communities. Area (3) deals with the significance and scope of research for educational practice and policy-making, including its importance for specific groups such as youth and children, and thereby for the future of society (Tangen, 2014, pp. 679–680).

The current study proposes to discuss the ethical behaviour that should be followed while conducting research on the implementation of school advisory programs in middle and high schools, applying Seedhouse's (1998a) ethical grid as a framework. The premise is that thinking through the ethical dimension of research in a logical and structured way can bring a level of clarity to this field. A framework for ethical analysis is introduced, based on the work of David Seedhouse (1998a), and a methodology for its use in educational research is presented. The use of this framework is validated through examples, along with the argument that effective ethical analysis requires such an analytical tool. This framework is not merely a set of guidelines or codes of practice — it is considerably more expansive and powerful than either. It offers a precise analytical procedure to ensure that a quality research process is conducted within a moral framework. This paper discusses the moral theory underlying Seedhouse's framework and examines the limitations and design of conventional approaches adopted by other authors (Stutchbury & Fox, 2009, p. 490).

Literature Review: Ethics in School Advisory Program Studies

An important consideration is that adherence to ethics should not be confined to the opening phase of a study. Rather, it should be a consistent concern throughout the process of investigation, serving as the driving force of any research study, and should be sustained during the write-up and dissemination stages as well (Abed, 2014–2015, pp. 1–2). This section therefore discusses the procedures that previous studies followed when collecting data on the implementation of school advisory programs in middle and high schools, and explores the extent to which those studies adhered to the norms of research ethics.

A study by O'Dowd, A Mixed-Methods Study of Middle School Advisory Programs: Staff Experiences, Perspectives, and Implementation in Three Suburban Middle Schools, focused specifically on identifying and explaining the role of staff participation in the advisory program at three schools, and on the recommendations staff members would make to administrators for its successful implementation. The study employs Creswell's mixed-methods research as a theoretical framework. A sequential research design — first quantitative, then qualitative — was used. An online survey was initially conducted to gather quantitative data on staff awareness and experiences with advisory programs, followed by interviews, document analysis, and non-participant observation to gather qualitative data that provided a more nuanced and deeper understanding of the topic (O'Dowd, 2012, p. 42).

An ethical concern in this study is that the researcher served as assistant principal in one of the participating middle schools. This familiarity with the staff and the advisory program created the potential for biased opinion. Such closeness could have been both an advantage and a limitation for the study's outcomes. The researcher's prior involvement in planning and implementing the program at her own school could have biased the findings in favor of middle school advisory programs (O'Dowd, 2012, pp. 13–14).

Another study, by Dooly — Academic Achievement in Arkansas High Schools Based on the Implementation Level of a Teacher Advisory Program — attempts to examine the influence of Teacher Advisory Programs (TAPS) on educational achievement and student motivation in Arkansas high schools, based on their level of program implementation, by comparing TAPS schools with similar non-TAPS schools. The researcher employs a quasi-experimental regression analysis to study the impact of TAPS on academic achievement. Data were gathered from the Arkansas School information site and the Arkansas Department of Education, including the Performance Report for years 2001 and 2004, and covered attendance rates, dropout rates, graduation rates, free-lunch eligibility percentages, teacher salaries, per-pupil expenditures, 8th Grade Literacy and Mathematics Benchmark scores, End-of-Course scores in Algebra, Geometry, and Literacy, and composite ACT scores (Dooly, 2013, p. 48).

The findings of this study were not favorable. No significant or reliable relationship was found between the implementation of an advisory program and higher academic achievement, after comparing 20 TAPS schools with 40 non-TAPS schools. The ethical concern here lies in the process of data collection: any leniency or carelessness in data handling could have skewed the results (Dooly, 2013, p. 61).

A study by Stawick explored the impact of advisory programs on student learning across three successive 8th-grade classes at Main School: the first class (2005) had no advisory program; the second (2006) had one year of advisory; and the third (2007) had two years of advisory program during 7th and 8th grade. The research compared these three classes based on academic performance to study the impact of the advisory program on student learning.

Creswell's quasi-experimental, ex-post facto model was used to compare groups without random selection of participants. Students were compared within each group by race, income, and gender across dependent variables (GPA, ISAT, and NWEA). This design has been regarded as a valid technique for examining between-group differences and determining their implications (Stawick, 2011, p. 57).

The literature also indicates that advisory programs, if carefully designed and well implemented, produce positive outcomes in schools. The best measure for assessing student learning is the NWEA test, as it is the only customized instrument designed to evaluate individual student growth. However, researchers must consider participants' comfort with technology and familiarity with computer-based testing, since the instrument is administered on a computer — a consideration that falls within the realm of informed consent in research ethics. Participant anonymity and comfort are the primary ethical concerns in this study (Stawick, 2011, p. 70).

A related study by James, Teacher's Perspectives of the Advisory Program: A Case Study of Curriculum and Implementation in an Urban Middle School, examined several advisory classrooms through observations and interviews to highlight teachers' experiences of this curriculum from multiple perspectives. Fullan's (1991) theoretical framework regarding teachers' roles as agents of change was used to situate their experiences of implementing an advisory curriculum in a large urban middle school (James, 2006, pp. 4–7).

The researcher specifically noted that fictitious names were used in place of the school's and teachers' real names. Classroom observations and audio-taped interviews were the primary means of data collection. Information was recorded as transcripts and field notes; member checks and observation were also conducted. All classrooms, times, dates, people, activities, and the researcher's own reactions were documented in a researcher's log to establish reliability (James, 2006, pp. 8–9). This researcher thus followed the ethical norms of privacy and confidentiality, informed consent, and careful data handling, thereby producing an ethically sound body of work.

A further study by Julie Ann Moore, Principals' Perspectives on Middle School Advisory Programs, sought to determine the perspectives of middle school principals on advisory programs. Focusing on the middle school model, this approach provides useful clarity by considering principals' views on advisory programs. Mac Iver's (1990) constructivist lens, applied within a qualitative study, was used as the theoretical framework, supporting the presumed significance of lived professional experience. The researcher carefully chose in-depth, formally structured interviews as the data collection instrument, to explore principals' viewpoints about advisory programs. Interviews, note-taking, and transcripts of audio recordings provided unique insight into participants' perspectives. The study assessed the extent to which principals' views aligned with or diverged from the stated purposes of advisory programs (Moore, 2014, p. 117).

However, the in-depth interviews in this project were conducted with a comparatively small number of participants. Collective or individual disclosures depend on the level of trust established and on ensuring that participants understand the implications of the interviews. The intention in this project, as in others involving interviews, is "to access the private and make it public" (Stutchbury & Fox, 2009, p. 499). The deontological framework suggests that this carries the possibility of causing harm, particularly if participants revisit past events and surface uncomfortable memories. Additionally, making personal information public raises problems of reporting (Stutchbury & Fox, 2009, pp. 499–500).

Seedhouse's Ethical Grid and Moral Theory

Researchers need to understand the core values of moral reasoning and morality before they can act ethically. Western moral philosophy offers two traditional theories: deontology and consequentialism. The basic tenet of deontology lies in "doing your duty" regardless of consequences. A deontologist would hold that certain actions — such as always keeping promises — are right irrespective of their outcomes. Consequentialism, or utilitarianism, on the other hand, judges morality on the basis of intended or anticipated outcomes: an action is morally justified if it produces more benefit than harm for the greatest number of people. Accordingly, breaking a promise can be morally justifiable if doing so brings good to a greater number of people (Stutchbury & Fox, 2009, p. 490).

To enhance moral reasoning in research, Seedhouse, a philosopher, designed an ethical grid that incorporates these theories of western moral philosophy. He argues that consistent use of this grid assimilates greater ethical awareness. The grid is not designed to provide solutions to ethical problems as such; rather, it structures the user's thinking so as to guide and enable recognition of issues and a systematic response to them. Decisions made through this process are more likely to be ethical, and the decision-making process itself becomes transparent and open to reason, reflection, and discussion. The four layers of the grid present four dimensions for complete ethical analysis:

(1) The outer or external layer addresses external issues such as codes of practice, law, and the use of available resources.

(2) The consequential layer encourages researchers to assess the possible consequences of their actions for society, for individuals, or for groups of people.

(3) The deontological layer is concerned with "duty" and how things should be done regardless of the consequences of those actions.

(4) The inner layer comprises the "core rationale" and addresses issues related to autonomy and respect for the individual (Stutchbury & Fox, 2009, pp. 490–492).

Conclusion

Research that involves interaction with people mostly has an ethical dimension, and educational research is no exception; its ethical concerns are often complex and keep changing as the research proceeds. The obligation of the researcher on ethical grounds is to strike a balance between respect towards participants and ensuring the reliability of the research — as well as ensuring that the reasoning behind ethical decisions is transparent and accessible to the reader. It is therefore essential that decisions taken have a defensible moral basis and that the process by which they are reached is also transparent (Stutchbury & Fox, 2009, p. 489).

This paper initially discussed ethical issues in education and emphasized the fact that ethics must be considered and followed not only at the commencement of a study, but throughout the entire research process. Key ethical issues, along with suggestions for addressing them, have also been discussed (Abed, 2014–2015, p. 9).