Ethical Considerations in the Current Study

Consideration of ethical standards is about seeking to do right (New Zealand Psychologists Board, 2002), it is about the correctness of actions (Miles & Huberman, 1994) and above all it is about respect for others (Sieber, 1992). Prior to making a full application to the Massey

University Human Ethics Committee, an ethical analysis of the project was undertaken. To assist in this process reference was made to the Massey University Code of Ethical Conduct for Research, Teaching and Evaluations involving Human Participants (Massey University, 2006) which listed the main principles requiring consideration as:

a) respect for persons;

b) minimisation of harm to participants, researchers, institutions, and groups; c) informed and voluntary consent;

d) respect for privacy and confidentiality; e) the avoidance of unnecessary deception; f) avoidance of conflict of interest;

g) social and cultural sensitivity to the age, gender, culture, religion, and social class of the participants; and

h) justice.

Both Massey University and the New Zealand Psychologists Board required due regard for

New Zealand’s cultural diversity and to the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi). Further, as a practicing, registered psychologist, the researcher was bound by the New Zealand Psychologists Board’s Code of Ethics (2002) which must be applied in respect of research activity. The main ethical principles in that Code (2002) are:

1. Respect for the dignity of persons and peoples; 2. Responsible caring;

3. Integrity in relationships;

4. Social justice and responsibility to society.

Ethical issues concerning the conduct of the study were discussed in professional supervision and with work colleagues within the Ministry of Education (MOE) who were teachers and Psychologists. Also, advice was sought from a friend who had just finished a PhD and from a number of parents with children in the same age range as the target students in the proposed study. Cultural advice and guidance were sought from Kaitakawaenga (MOE advisor to ensure culturally-appropriate service to Māori), Pasifika Cultural Advisor (MOE), Samoan Matai (Chief), Indian Psychologist, Hindu Priest, and other MOE work colleagues as

population (e.g. Cook Islands, Tongan). These people also assisted with appropriate greetings and introductions in the introductory letters. After discussion in supervision and with due cognisance of the aforementioned principles, a formal application was made and the current project was reviewed and approved by the Massey University Human Ethics Committee in August 2008.

During the research process particular consideration was afforded the following ethical matters: minimisation of risk of harm, processes of informed and voluntary consent, especially in regard to research involving minors, respect for privacy and confidentiality, and respect for persons in regard to social and cultural sensitivity. Each of these principles will be discussed in turn.

Minimisation of Risk of Harm

In regard to the subject matter of the research, it was considered because the study had a strength focus and emphasised reflection on positive experiences little risk was posed. Further, participants were assured that any contributions would be valued.

During project planning inconvenience was recognised as a potential key issue both for schools and families. Consequently the project management was fully negotiated with schools prior to the commencement of the research. Information Sheets invited people to participate and detailed the possible time commitment. Thus, people were able to make informed decisions at that time whether they wished to participate and make a commitment to the research.

The intrusion into school life had the potential to be harmful to the progress of a student’s learning on a particular day. Thus, all timings for data collection was negotiated with schools and managed by schools. They decided how students were accessed, the best time for students to be called from class and how they might catch up on any work missed. In actuality this proved to be a negligible issue as most data collection was organised either in tutor periods, assembly time or at lunch times.

The intrusion into staff life, as part of staff participation and staff management of student processes (consent, questionnaire collection, student management), was acknowledged to be a

considerable undertaking. However, once negotiated, it was found that school staff willingly accepted this responsibility as they could see the potential in the research and the benefits it might bring to them and the possibilities to enhance transition outcomes for students and families in the future.

The intrusion into family life was also considered. Voluntary consent processes enabled families to decline the invitation to participate if they were unable to dedicate the time to the research requirements as outlined in the Information Sheet.

In regard to the identification of students, this process was routinely carried out by schools therefore in planning the research study no risks were foreseen in regard to that identification process.

Informed Consent

In ethical terms, to provide consent, one must have all information needed to make an informed choice and understood that information (knowledge), have the ability to make a decision (competence), and give of their own freewill (voluntarily) (Grisso & Vierling, 1978; Ministry of Education, 2006b). Sandoval and Irvin (2003) put it this way: “To give consent an individual must know what will be done, why it will be done and how it will be done” (p. 67).

To enable members of school communities (parents and caregivers, children, and teachers) to make informed decisions about their participation in the research, project information was supplied in written form through introductory letters, school newsletters and Information Sheets. Information was also provided verbally (in person) at school staff meetings, school

parents’ evenings and read out to students before any data collection commenced.

Information Sheets and Consent Forms were sent home with targeted students. Although parental or caregiver approval was the first step in the consent process, students were given the opportunity to personally consent to participation or decline the invitation. The Information Sheet, already provided for each student (Appendix A1), was read aloud in the group meeting when there was opportunity for discussion and questions, and the voluntary nature of participation was thoroughly explained.

In line with current practice, gaining consent was not a one-off process (Ministry of Education, 2006b). Instead consent was revisited through explanation of participant rights and re-established at each phase of the research before further data collection was undertaken. Furthermore, because of the time lapse between Phase One and Phase Two of the data collection, Information Sheets were provided once again to all students and family participants.

Following Phase Three all participants viewed the transcriptions of their interviews and were given the opportunity to comment on or amend their words and to authorise the release of the transcript to be used in the research or subsequent publications. The implications of that authorisation were explained to all participants at the time.

No inducements were offered to participants to acquire consent and at no time were staff members, family members or students subjected to undue influence by the researcher to take part in the study. Participation was in response to invitation and therefore was voluntary (Cottrell & McKenzie, 2011).

Respect for Privacy and Confidentiality

A confidentiality agreement informs participants what will be done with their contributions and how that data will be managed in terms of their privacy (Sieber, 1992). In the current study confidentiality was addressed at the access stage with principals and BOTs, at each stage of participant consent (invitation, questionnaire completion, interview, transcript release), and at the transcription stage. The transcriber signed a confidentiality agreement (Appendix G3) before audio tapes were forwarded for transcription.

Participants were assured that the researcher would respect the privacy of all information contributed, that no district, school or person would be identified in any writing or publications. Students were assured that their family members and teachers would not be able to read the information they provided. Further, school staff members were advised that their contributions would not be accessible by either their school management or the Ministry of Education. Where face-to-face data collection occurred, an additional verbal assurance of protection of identity in the management of data and in any writing was offered by the researcher.

Social and Cultural Sensitivity

It is important that participants are acknowledged and feel valued for the commitment made to research (Sieber, 1992). In the present study information sessions and data collection in schools were organised at mutually agreed times to minimise intrusion and to fit in with school programmes. Parent and caregiver interviews were organised at mutually convenient times and locations to suit families. Interview appointments were not pressured and time was devoted to building rapport and ease with families.

Further, it is important that the act of valuing is extended via the communication and sharing of research outcomes (Sieber, 1992). The personal accounts and ideas were shared in good faith so the passing back of research results is not only a logical sequel but also an ethical obligation (Cottrell & McKenzie, 2011). Thus, in respect of research findings, participants were informed that a summary of findings would be supplied in written form to all participants, schools, and Boards of Trustees. Moreover, offers were made to address school community meetings at schools’ request.

No particular cultural group was the primary focus in the research. However, because the research locality was one of ethnic diversity, cultural advice was sought from Pasifika (Samoan, Tongan, and Nuiean), Māori, and Indian advisors both in the design of the study and before the interview stage of data collection. The researcher wanted to ensure an awareness of cultural practices and protocols especially in respect of visiting families in their homes. On the basis of advice received, each interview participant was given a small koha (gift) in appreciation of the time given and possible inconvenience that the research may have created.