Ethical Issues and Methodological Justification

As noted in Section 3.2, the target population for this research was disproportionately small, the investigation involved a degree of sensitivity

towards the respondents to protect their identity. The empirical investigation in the main was interviews based involving the first generation ABME principals, the class of 1998/9 – 2008/9 in FE colleges, providing an historic and significant snapshot of their distinctive experiences. Their life histories have provided a unique understanding and knowledge of their personal and professional journeys, the qualities and characteristics of their leadership and its approach priority. The investigation has aimed to identify and show the motivations, which have driven them as educationalists and leaders in FE colleges. The majority of principals who participated in this research are still in service as leading educationalists and leadership practitioners in the field of Further Education. Their personal and professional identities must be protected as information and data could be attributed inappropriately to individuals. Therefore it was not advisable to go beyond their collective identity as a target group of ABME principals in FE colleges. The target group though small, however, is diverse and is comprised of distinguishable educationalists in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, disability, location, heritage, culture, professional identity and so on. A further research can be rewarding to analyse the outcomes of this investigation in terms of a differentiated comparative study, however, it can only be a recommendation but is beyond the scope in this study.

In terms of methodology and methods used for this investigation, it was an advantage to be able to interview the peer group of ABME principals, no inhibitions or barriers were experienced in the process. Referring to the research in the USA Gunaratnam (2003) noted that the research participants

are less willing to tell interviewers from another ethnic/racial group what they really think with regards to their attitude, opinions and experiences about such topics as this investigation has followed. No such issues or inhibitions were applicable, however, due to lack of methodological modelling and analyses in using the interviewing method by an ABME involving ABME participants, the issue of further reforming, improving or re-modelling the approach was not a consideration. In the absence of any comparisons and contrasts in research design and strategies in this area, Gunaratnam (2003) maintains that in Britain, despite increasing numbers of academics from ABME backgrounds, the number of researchers is still relatively small, especially in the social sciences. It can be argued in the context of this investigation that the number is insufficient in the field of Further Education, as Weindling (1999) has also shown in terms of secondary schools that there were too few women in headship/school leadership positions to make reliable comparisons. FE colleges are far more diverse in terms of their provision, circumstances, situational profile, socio-economic conditions of the localities and the demographic factors including ethnicity and race. The advantage of leadership interviews with ABME principals was that they have also provided an opportunity to explore an overview of the cultures, ethos and organisation of FE colleges - reflecting a totality of the dynamics of their leadership. Bridge (1994) suggests that principals and senior managers provide the role models, even if they do not determine the colleges’ overall culture but they significantly influence the roles and directions of their staff and managers.

Moddood and Acland (1998, p106) noted that “While the orientation of the most research on race and education to date has been in seeking explanation of why minorities are not doing as well as their white peers, it has not engaged with questions that could explain why some ethnic minority groups not just individuals but groups might do better than their white peers…”. The process of this study though has progressively advanced in this direction of finding out what unique - new, different and additional - ABME principals have done as principals in FE colleges, despite many impediments that they may have encountered as compared with their White European peers (Appendices: 7.2.2; Figure 3; 7.2.3e-h; 7.2.4, Sections 2.9). The findings and outcomes of this investigation will have captured and analysed relevant factors which have driven the leadership of ABME principals to be effective in their performance. Some of the anecdotes which would have to be anonymised to protect the individual identity and his/her place of work would suggest that they have been innovative in addressing the progressive issues of fairness, equality, diversity, inclusivity and social justice in Further Education ahead of the policy and legislative development which have provided the present Single Equality Framework (Ofsted, 209b). I have received a good level of support with a degree of curiosity and expressions of interest in this research and did not experience any moral and ethical tensions in completing this investigation; rather academically it has been an elating and enriching experience.

The outcomes of this research would be relatively new and should make an original contribution on the theme of leadership study in the field of FE

colleges. Not only is this investigation a production of new knowledge, it has potential to impact on the Government’s changing and developing priorities for Pre and Post 19 education (AoC, 2009; LSN, 2009, HMG, 2010; BIS 2010ab). It has potential to influence the policies and strategies to tackle employment and skills issues (Bewick, 2009), debate on resourcing of FE colleges and decisions relating to developing an inclusive and diverse multi- racial leadership for Further Education. The overall methodology adopted is advantageous in exploring the successive Governments’ policy and strategic priorities which have involved commitment to raising of skills and widening participation in Further Education, to provide an inclusive education to enhance community involvement to achieve greater social cohesion, fairness, equality and social mobility (HMG, 2010; BIS 2010ab). The forthcoming reductions in public expenditure on Further Education as a result of the recent comprehensive spending review (CSR) would pose new challenges for FE college leadership in general and ABME leadership in particular (Lee, 2010d, TES FE Focus, 2010c).