Appendix 4

appendix 4

Interview with Gordon Dryden, Director of Policy and Research For Post Sixteen Education and Training, RNIB Monday 18th. October 1994

This interview was conducted by arrangement with the RNIB, after ringing their London Headquarters. Gordon Dryden (GD) is their Director of Policy for Post Sixteen Education and Training, based at the Loughborugh college for training and rehabilitation. His job not only deals with the research and training of clients of the RNIB in institutes, it also handles the lobbying of, and consultancy for, government agencies.

GD's educational background is varied. At undergraduate level, he trained as a sculptor. In fact, he said he still teaches sculpture to blind students every now and again. However, during his first degree he was also heavily influenced by sociological theory. Latterly, his master's degree was in psychology, and he still holds a strong interest in this subject.

In this interview, he talked frankly through his knowledge and about his experiences of the ethics of research while working under the auspices of the RNIB. In addition, during the interview he also expressed opinions about the general ethics of research in this field, drawing on subjects he has worked with independently. These included psychology, sociology, philosophy and education. I have interpreted these issues not only as personal, but also broadly representing the views of the organisation in which he holds high office.

Data Gathering & Strategy. I first asked for an explanation of the official policy of the RNIB, especially in relation to its social scientific research of adults. Apparently there was no official policy, instead they based their ethics on methods they felt to be morally and logically acceptable. This is expressed through several strategies, not all of which he felt relevant or able to talk about.

One strategy he did regard as valuable and relevant was the protection, application and gathering of data about its members. (In the interview, he referred to the members more as the "clients" of the organisation, consuming their services and having rights to representation.) When all RNIB research data is gathered, it is encoded in several computerised databases. This is then used for interpretative, secondary source research. And it is the bulk of the research of the RNIB. The database referring to GD's section is autonomous (based on a single computer) and heavily guarded by a security system. This is managed by a named database manager who bares all responsibility for access to it. (Happening to be GD's PA.) She is the only person officially allowed to hold the password.

To get information from the database, a full written application has to be submitted. This is also recorded. For this reason, requesters are made to justify their requests creating a further ethical safety net. However, despite all of these safety nets and security systems, the information recorded is never too personal or confidential, as they do not feel the need to use this type of information.

(In other arenas, the RNIB do commission some medical research, but this hardly ever crosses GD's path. However, when this does occur, the subjects are always anonymous, and non specific.)

The nature of the research policy and strategy is usually guided by the nature of the database's information. This is very rarely gathered by the RNIB, but by known external institutes and individuals. In this case, the research usually takes the form of experiences within education and training, and the attitudes of employers to their visually disabled employees. However, this form of research and strategy is currently undergoing a sea change, with a new policy currently being mapped for the future.

Firstly, the data to be gathered will be centralised and networked. In the context of the RNIB this has never been done before, whether on computer or paper. This will bring together all types of information about their clients. All of this data will then be encoded in a hierarchical database, built over several layers and have autonomous access codes. These will have separate passwords at nodes.

Because the system will be totally computerised, access to information will be recorded through the database. This will allow patterns of access to be interpreted. However, the managers role is not over ridden, as she will continue to determines the access. (All research subjects are, of course, legally entitled to see their records at any time under the Data Protection Act.)

Secondly, and more importantly, there is a current initiative to move to qualitative, observational case study research rather than large scale quantitative studies. This initiative is currently being draughted by the RNIB. This will represent a strong move away from traditional, empirical data gathering. The implications of such a move will also be expressed by a further move away from secondary source research (usually externally commissioned) to primary source data, gathered and provided in response to specific issues. This will make it more effective and political.

Another ironic implication of the move away from quantitative study is that it will reduce the use and need for the social science section of the new centralised database. Because the information gathered from this study will be qualitative narrative, it cannot be stored in what is thought of as a traditional database. Its subjects will also hold a far higher profile, their personal lives becoming private property and raising new dilemmas. Although GD has warned subjects participating in the limited studies of the past (some coming forward in the first place to be studied) they never expected the attention they do receive. (However, despite these negative implications, GD thought the move towards this style of research was positive.)

In addition to the advantageous data storage issues, detailed recording of highly individual reactions depletes the chance of total theories and over generalisation, and so becomes ethical on a very broad level. Also, even though involving a lot more trust between individual and researcher, the chance its data can be adversely manipulated through secondary interpretation is reduced as it becomes heavily contextualised. This also makes it better and more socially ethical and useful research. He gave a good example of this scenario. In the past GD has seen research created by charities which has too specific a focus, only furthering the needs of the organisation it was created for. In addition, the creators of such research are usually unrepresentative of the client group they purport to represent. This research has too often involved manipulation and interpretation of statistical data.

To further their new policy, the RNIB is entering into open collaboration with the University of Sussex, which has a centre for the study of mass observation. Further reports and studies are being drafted to further a standard method. This is felt to be important for the RNIB to maintain its moral imperative.

The Language of Research. After this line of questioning, I led our discussion towards points GD had raised earlier about the relationship between language and definition within research. In this, he raised the point about the misleading relationship between medical and social scientific definitions of disability, and the miscasting of the former onto the latter.

GD thought the public saw blindness as a disease itself, as opposed to a condition formed as the result of a disease. In addition, people tended to regard blindness as a total loss of sight, which it very rarely is. To begin with, most people within the RNIB’s client group are partially sighted, and registered visually impaired rather than blind. And even of those registered blind, most have some form of light recognition, and not merely a black screen inside of their heads.

The complications within language and definition are furthered by the fact different forms of visual impairment and blindness cause different modes of lost vision over time. This effects both the sociological and psychological effects of blindness. For example, a person suffering a congenital blindness will have a completely different mindset to that of a person suffering a late form of blindness. The former will have no conception of visual phenomena, such as the colour changes of a two-dimensional surface (a picture), whereas the latter will have memories that are dominated by these phenomena. Socially and psychologically, this may place the latter closer to sighted rather than congenitally blind individuals, creating dilemmas and clouding studies of important issues, such as sexuality and blindness.

Another ambiguity encountered is the inclusion of blindness in studies involving several variables. An example of this is the study of blindness in relation to age. With the demographics of the blind and visually impaired population shifting from congenital to much later blindness, people are finding ambiguities of their role in society. A good example of these phenomena is an older person who loses his or her sight as a part of the normal ageing process. How does this person fit into the greater society? They may feel they are still sighted, having lived and feeling comfortable within this society more than any other. This may even lead into a stage of denial, in which the person bumps into tables and chairs, but does not want to admit this is because of failing vision.

Within both of the above cases, ethical dilemmas are raised from the ambiguities of the original social groups. Not only does someone's current blindness become of interest to the study, but their life history also. This involves probing into the subjects' very personal and private pasts, involving extremely sensitive subjects. In this case, social quagmires must be entered and taboos challenged or even broken.

In the case of the direct application to the study of art and blindness, GD raised several points relating to his own experiences. For example, completely blind students will create radically different artefacts from those with partial sight. The latter creating artefacts similar to sighted students, except taking longer to do so. In this case, the gap between students diagnosed medically as having very small visual acuity (say 8/20) will be more similar to people with a perfect visual acuity (20/20) than the extremely rare case of students considered as having no visual acuity (>2/20).

In the case of the above ambiguity, GD found visual impairment analogous to the US definition of being a black person. There they classify any person containing 1/8 black ancestry as African American - only “total” European ancestry entitling people to "whiteness." This reflects the current classification of visual impairment very nicely, with only perfect vision being classifiable as sighted, and the possession of any kind of impairment placing the subject in a completely different medical group.

However despite his analogy, GD also stressed the total classification of impairment and race is very misleading in social research. Subjects should be treated as individuals, even in a phenomenological classification. This said, the point should not be taken to an extreme by an existential definition being placed on individuals. GD insisted that he was still structuralist in his interpretation, with subjects fitting into loose, functional categories. Ethically, he thought this sounded more in agreement with the symbolic interactionist stance. Individuals should have their cases explained, and then seen in the context of their past and present social circumstances, defined through their symbolic representation. Otherwise, the reader of the research ends up with a very false impression of theories, only interpreting phenomena on a surface level. This situation can be more harmful than creating no correlation whatsoever. Again, he believed this made the case study approach more ethical than previous statistical methods.

Practical Issues. After our discussion about the definition, classification and language of theoretical research, I changed the line of questioning back to highly practical issues. Remembering he had previously mentioned the external commissioning of research from outside bodies, I pursued the RNIB's ethical policy of guidelines, which these contractees adhered to. Did they have stricter guidelines than the RNIB's own researchers? GD responded with a very firm yes. Again, the RNIB has ethical responsibility and has to maintain its moral high ground.

The ambiguity of the role of the researcher can often cause ethical problems. For example, it is understood academics are working primarily as an intellectual exercise when researching. In this case, the idea holds greater value than it application. The RNIB, on the other hand, has to think of the practical utility and application of the research on its clients. Because of this consideration, research is mainly commissioned for a specific reason at a specific time. The policy makers of the RNIB determine this commissioning.

A good example of the RNIB's commissioned research would be the adverse consequences of being a blind employee. These would be case studies and/or surveys. However, only known academics, if possible, would be commissioned to do this. If the academic is unknown, they have to be checked out - but this would only happen on a surface level. (For example, they cannot check any form of criminal record.) The RNIB does not have the authority or capability to do any more than this. And anyway, it usually only takes the form of asking known academics of others' reputations.

In addition to the checking of contractees' pasts, if the RNIB commissions a psychological study, it will insist on the enforcement of the British Psychological Society's guidelines. In addition, if the research is of the RNIB's counselling service, they will ask for the guidelines of the British Association of Councillors to be adhered too. However, the insistence on these is not as strong as the British Psychological Society's. These are regarded as the standard.

The access to recorded and stored data has similarities to the commissioning of the research, in that only known organisations are given access. And even when given access, the amount and type of information available is strictly limited. For example, no information is broadcast to external organisations which allows for the commercial exploitation of the RNIB's clients.

At this point, I raised a hypothetical situation with GD. Supposing a new but seemingly important organisation asked for information, would you consider giving it to them. And if you would, how would you assess their suitability to be given this information. His answer stated this situation was difficult to assess. GD thought he would first have to check out the organisation's philosophies, aims and limited record of achievement. He would also have to check out the personnel involved in the organisation, and their past track records. As before, this investigation could not be covert, and had to be through existing contacts in the area of the organisation's base.

Another way in which GD could be sure an organisation's intentions were honourable would to be to commission research in conjunction with an official organisation, such as a government department. This collaborating organisation would certainly have the ability to investigate new authorities and individuals in great depth. However, as was mentioned before, the RNIB must maintain the moral high ground with all people, and so would not insist on too stringent an investigation. If these imperatives were ignored, the RNIB would loose the credibility of its client group, and as an effective organisation.

Media Guidelines. After this line of questioning, I switched again, raising a point very much in connection with my personal experiences of observing in the studio. I asked if there were any media guidelines for both recording data, and presenting it. This bore in mind some of the RNIB's clients may have had no conception of certain phenomena, such as television. (This is why I refused to use a video camera when recording teaching sessions.) GD thought refusal of animate two dimensional material was fair, as this equipment had no way of providing direct feedback to any of the research subjects.

This linked to one of GD's other points. He felt the researcher, both academically, and in the case of researchers of blind subjects (sensorialy at least) held tremendous power. This power could not afford to be exploited, with the researcher making the subject feel inadequate and lowly. GD saw an example of this phenomena when watching a video by another organisation. In this documentary, the mistakes of certain blind subjects were reported as the inadequate way to perform tasks portrayed through the video. GD felt this was incredibly exploitative, and way beyond the boundaries of decency and taste. (reinforced by the fact the video's subjects could not see it and comment, making it doubly immoral.)

Further trouble with video recording blind subjects, especially congenitally blind subjects, was the problem of the camera recording embarrassing gestures and motions the subjects may not realise to be normally unacceptable. (Both because people are afraid of correcting blind people, and because they cannot observe normal social standards.) For example, they may eat with their mouth open, or scratch themselves extrovertly. Apart from this information being unimportant to the researcher, this may cause further embarrassment to the subject if the video is subsequently shown in relation to presentation of evidence.

Self Awareness. I then raised another dilemma I had encountered. When observing sighted students taking pen and paper notes they had been able to see me, and so could judge my presence and their place in the observation by the amount I wrote. However, the blind students I had observed, more often than not, forgot I was there. In fact, when I gave my customary thanks at the end of an observation session, they would often express surprise I was still there. Although these phenomena made their behaviour more natural, it led me into an ethical dilemma of whether I should be watching subjects who could not monitor my behaviour. On this point, GD felt that I should not be too sensitive. After all, with the current state of technology, this situation was unrectifiable. And after all, some form of observational research needs to be done, especially in education. On a personal level, GD felt that treating blind people far more sensitively than sighted was patronising. Blind people should not be wrapped in cotton wool. An example he gave was that of an individual he knew who was blind and obnoxious. GD felt he had to be challenged as any other obnoxious individual. If he was not, he could not rectify his personality or be accepted as playing a full part in society. Something’s just are, and should be treated as such.

However on the above issue, after making his personal point, GD felt it was necessary to reiterate the importance of feedback. He seemed to think it positive I offered the opportunity to all of my subjects, blind and sighted, to review their notes. Making them available in a variety of media was especially important. However, for the sake of the impartiality of the research, I should also not amend sections for the sake of my subjects.

British Educational Research Association Ethical Guidelines

Please go to http://www.bera.org.uk

Interview with Gordon Dryden, Director of Policy and Research For Post Sixteen Education and Training, RNIB Monday 18th. October 1994

One he did regard valuable and relevant was the protection, application and gathering of data about its members. (In the interview, he referred to the members more as the "clients" of the organisation, consuming their services and having rights to representation.) When all RNIB research data is gathered, it is encoded in several computerised databases. This is then used for interpretative, secondary source research. And it is the bulk of the research of the RNIB. The database referring to GD's section is autonomous (based on a single computer) and heavily guarded by a security system. This is managed by a named database manager who bares all responsibility for access to it. (Happening to be GD's PA.) She is the only person officially allowed to hold the password.

To get information from the database, a full written application has to be submitted. This is also recorded. For this reason, requesters are made to justify their requests creating a further ethical safety net. However, despite all of these safety nets and security systems, the information recorded is never too personal or confidential as they do not feel the need to use this type of information.

(In other arenas, the RNIB do commission some medical research, but this hardly ever crosses GD's path. However, when this does occur, the subjects are always anonymous, and non specific.)

To further their new policy, the RNIB is entering into open collaboration with the University of Sussex, which has a centre for the study of mass observation. Further reports and studies are being draughted to further a standard method. This is felt to be important for the RNIB to maintain its moral imperative.

The complications within language and definition are furthered by the fact different forms of visual impairment and blindness cause different modes of lost vision over time. This effects both the sociological and psychological effects of blindness. For example, a person suffering a congenital blindness will have a completely different mindset to that of a person suffering a late form of blindness. The former will have no conception of visual phenomena, such as the colour changes of a two dimensional surface (a picture), whereas the latter will have memories that are dominated by these phenomena. Socially and psychologically, this may place the latter closer to sighted rather than congenitally blind individuals, creating dilemmas and clouding studies of important issues, such as sexuality and blindness.

Another ambiguity encountered is the inclusion of blindness in studies involving several variables. An example of this is the study of blindness in relation to age. With the demographics of the blind and visually impaired population shifting from congenital to much later blindness, people are finding ambiguities of their role in society. A good example of this phenomena is an older person who looses his or her sight as a part of the normal ageing process. How does this person fit into the greater society? They may feel they are still sighted, having lived and feeling comfortable within this society more than any other. This may even lead into a stage of denial, in which the person bumps into tables and chairs, but does not want to admit this is because of failing vision.

Within both of the above cases, ethical dilemmas are raised from the ambiguities of the original social groups. Not only does someone's current blindness become of interest to the study, but their life history also. This involves probing into the subjects very personal and private pasts, involving extremely sensitive subjects. In this case, social quagmires must be entered and taboos challenged or even broken.

Practical Issues. After our discussion about the definition, classification and language of theoretical research, I changed the line of questioning back to highly practical issues. Remembering he had previously mentioned the external commissioning of research from outside bodies, I pursued the RNIB's ethical policy of guidelines which these contractees adhered to. Did they have stricter guidelines than the RNIB's own researchers? GD responded with a very firm yes. Again, the RNIB has ethical responsibility and has to maintain its moral high ground.

The ambiguity of the role of the researcher can often cause ethical problems. For example, it is understood academics are working primarily as an intellectual exercise when researching. In this case, the idea holds greater value than it application. The RNIB, on the other hand, has to think of the practical utility and application of the research on its clients. Because of this, research is mainly commissioned for a specific reason at a specific time. This is determined by the policy makers of the RNIB.

Self Awareness. I then raised another dilemma I had encountered. When observing sighted students taking pen and paper notes they had been able to see me, and so could judge my presence and their place in the observation by the amount I wrote. However, the blind students I had observed, more often than not, forgot I was there. In fact, when I gave my customary thanks at the end of an observation session, they would often express surprise I was still there. Although this phenomena made their behaviour more natural, it led me into an ethical dilemma of whether I should be watching subjects who could not monitor my behaviour. On this point, GD felt that I should not be too sensitive. After all, with the current state of technology, this situation was unrectifiable. And after all, some form of observational research needs to be done, especially in education. On a personal level, GD felt that treating blind people far more sensitively than sighted was patronising. Blind people should not be wrapped in cotton wool. An example he gave was of an individual he knew who was blind and obnoxious. GD felt he had to be challenged as any other obnoxious individual. If he was not, he could not rectify his personality or be accepted as playing a full part in society. Something’s just are, and should be treated as such.

A study of the ethics involved in the educational research of SEN pupils

Interview with Martin Lawn, Secretary General of the European Educational Research Association in Worcester on the 26^th May 2000.

1. What is EERA’s remit regarding setting policies and methods of good practice for international educational research?

2. What is EERA’s view of the importance of ethical approaches to educational research?

3. Without giving specific examples, have you ever come across research projects that you considered unethical? And in which ways were they unethical?

4. Is EERA aware of the codes of ethics of other national and international educational research institutions? And if it is, what opinion does it hold of these codes of practice?

5. Why does EERA not have its own code of ethics?

6. Do you feel that EERA is an institution that has influence or power in asking its members to conduct research within ethical guidelines?

7. What major principles do you feel members of EERA should adhere to when conducting research investigations?

8. Do you regard ethical implications as a paramount consideration when conducting educational research, or do you consider the ability to collect unimpeded data as more important?

9. What views do you hold about gaining the consent of research subjects before conducting research with them?

10. What views do you hold about the media used in educational research and its ethical implications?

A study of the ethics involved in educational research involving SEN students.

Report Of The Interview With Professor Martin Lawn In His Capacity As Secretary General of the European Educational Research Association (EERA) Which Took Place In Worcester On The 26^th May 2000.

Introduction

This interview almost did not occur. Professor Lawn and I had to change prospective interview dates on several occasions, as our timetables never seemed to overlap. In the end, it took literally months to find a time that was convenient to both of us, after passing emails back and forth during winter 2000. (Professor Lawn spent most of this time flying around Europe fulfilling his official duties and I found I spent almost all of my time at school in Evesham, settling in to my first year of teaching outside of London.) An even greater irony is given to the situation in which we continued to miss eachother as I discovered in the course of our correspondence that we both live in Worcester. In addition, we are both at Birmingham University’s School of Education – although this is a very big institution, I am a part-time student and he is one of the most senior teaching staff.

Eventually, after coordinating our dates and having an unfortunate missed evening a few days before, I met Professor Lawn in a French cafe in the small tourist quarter of Worcester. I feel that this was a good decision as it provided a very relaxed atmosphere and the interview took on a more conversational, friendly tone rather than an air of strict formality that many of my official interviews can often take. It was, I felt, because of the relaxed atmosphere that our dialogue initially ignored the questions I had written down, and Professor Lawn and I spent a good hour talking about my project. This, I have to admit, was not the original intention, but Professor Lawn asked a great deal of questions about the background of the research. - A conversation that came about after I had given what I thought was a very brief summary of my research activities and described the context of the interview as I saw it -. In a similar vein to the venue, I felt that this conversation enhanced the interview’s relaxed approach, leaving me to feel unafraid about asking contentious questions and as a result received (what appear to be) more honest and direct answers.

The recording of data during this interview was done with pen and paper. This follows a trend begun in my earlier interviews with other official bodies. Although more difficult, it does appear in this and other interviews that pen and paper recording allows for the establishment of a greater trust between the interviewer and interviewee. This does have the down side, however, of making the data theoretically more interpretive and less accurate. It is for this reason, as well as for ethical reasons of disclosure, that I submitted the draft of this report to Professor Lawn for evaluation and amendment. If he feels that I have misrepresented his arguments in any way, he will be able to change them.

EERA’s Role in Promoting Research Ethics

· What is EERA’s remit regarding setting policies and methods of good practice for international educational research? Professor Lawn feels that at the moment, EERA does not have such a remit, as it is still in its infancy. However, in the long term he feels that EERA should have stronger views concerning issues related to the practice of educational research. In this regard, EERA is certainly weaker than, for example, the British Educational Research Association (BERA), as this organisation has an ethical policy. In addition to the problems raised by its relative newness and lack of recognition – it has only been in existence for 6 years - EERA also finds it difficult to locate resources and develop an organisational infrastructure. Professor Lawn feels that when managing finances, all of EERA’s resources go into their annual conference, membership expenses and a website, which financially only just break even.

A further factor that Professor Lawn feels will be problematic in the development of a pan-European ethical structure is EERA’s representation and integration of its individual national research associations. As EERA is a pan-European, pan-cultural organisation, what over-riding culture should it encompass? From a discussion resulting from this question, Professor Lawn also discussed further possible questions regarding the integration of the work of different cultures. For example, what is it to be a European organisation? How can different cultures integrate their ideas? Although EERA aspires to be a synergetic organisation, it must still face many of these initial problems before its ideal of being a true European institution can be achieved. Saying this, Professor Lawn also feels that national associations already work within their own tight social and cultural boundaries – and so the present need for a single set of ethical guidelines is not urgent.

· What is EERA’s view of the importance of ethical approaches to educational research? Professor Lawn feels that this answer is similar to EERA’s answer to the first question. In other words, EERA has no official opinion on this view currently. However, this does not mean that it does not want one or will not have one in the future. Again, in the British example BERA has a far greater role in defining the role of methodologies, and ethical and moral issues in the British Isles than EERA. In this context, EERA unfortunately has an under developed/developing role, which needs enhancing in the future.

· Without giving specific examples, have you ever come across research projects that you have considered unethical? And in which ways were they unethical? Professor Lawn feels that he can not really answer this question. This reticence, Professor Lawn feels, is not so much as a result of an unwillingness to commit to an answer, but more to do with the fact that he thinks that EERA, as an organisation has not considered this issue. Answer interpretation for original replaced by: “EERA….. has not been able to develop a conversation about policies such as ethics…… I believe that the creation of the new PostGrad network is the way into this area now and may begin soon.”. However, there are several issues that he does consider contentious. Answer interpretation for original replaced by: “[Research] ethics are not just about interpersonal relations (as in a case study or ethnography) nor in analytical transparency (as in history or sociology) but are fundamentally about power relations. I would imagine that this is an issue which affect most [educational] researchers whichever regime they are working under or with – from the old East to the DfEE. Democracy, as one form of ethical relations, or discourse about them, is less and less associated with [educational] research in a period of utilitarian governance with data.”

Conversely, Professor Lawn does feel that there should be an EERA debate in order to formulate a policy relating to the ethics of research methodology. Saying this, Professor Lawn also feels that EERA has not evolved or developed enough and does not have the infrastructure to think about such issues now. It is Professor Lawn’s view that EERA will not be in a position to start debating or drafting any policy documents on this issue for approximately 2 ½ years (sic).

· Is EERA aware of the codes of ethics of other national and international educational research institutions? And if it is, what opinion does it hold about the contents of these codes of practice? Professor Lawn feels again that EERA will have problems because it is an organisation with an evolving focus and has many small, disparate national elements. At this stage of its inception, it cannot have an awareness of itself as a cohesive organisation. It can therefore have no policy on methodological issues. For this reason, EERA can only really be viewed as a supplementary service for other national organisations. This service is delivered in the form of its website, its newsletters and in the organisation of its annual conference, all of which are only meant to financially break even. At present, EERA is yet to make an impact on, and have an influence over, other organisations within a greater Europe. Therefore, Professor Lawn feels that EERA can only take small steps now, as it has to integrate a large number of European institutions with a broad range of academic cultures. In this way, it would be too difficult, Professor Lawn feels, to impose a group of beliefs from a single European organisation quickly. In addition, Professor Lawn made the following comment: “…. EERA really could not impose – it is an association of associations and, I think, would have to avoid managing the difficulties of managing any controversial (or even indifferently translated) idea which could bind all.”

· Why does EERA not have its own code of ethics? Professor Lawn referred me to the answer to question 4.

· Do you feel that EERA is an institution that has influence or power in asking its members to conduct research within ethical guidelines? Professor Lawn feels that EERA could have an influential role in the future. Although it currently does not see itself as having influences at present, EERA does aspire in the long term to prescribe good practice in issues such as research ethics. Nevertheless, as Professor Lawn mentioned in the answer he gave to earlier questions, he does not feel that it will be easy to integrate the different organisational and academic cultures of other countries’ research associations into this prescription. Integration will be particularly difficult when overcoming language difficulties, traditions, the standardisation of definitions and so forth. Again, Professor Lawn feels that this will need to be a long-term aspiration, which will only be in a position to be started in approximately 2 ½ years time when EERA has a more developed infrastructure – although no reason was given for this specific time scale.

· What major ethical principles do you feel EERA members should adhere to when conducting research investigations? Professor Lawn feels that this question is too difficult to answer. It appears too complex an issue to address presently. However, one issue Professor Lawn feels that would be useful to overcome is the academic system of patronage in which professors in many instances appear to have power over what researchers under their influence can and cannot publish. This system of patronage, Professor Lawn feels, stifles debate in many arenas. Deconstructing this system of patronage will take time and be very difficult.

· What views do you hold about gaining the consent of research subjects before conducting research with them? Professor Lawn feels that the issue of consent by research subjects before conducting research is certainly a problem or at least a major issue when conducting social research. However, the discussion of this problem mainly revolves around the issue of the subjects of the research making informed choices about their roles in the research, and the sort of information that they wish to surrender.

Two Questions That Were Cut From the Interview.

· Does EERA regard ethics a major consideration when conducting educational research, or does it consider the ability to collect unimpeded data as more important?

· What views do you hold about the media used in educational research and its ethical implications?

Eco Sound Logo

To contact us:

E-mail:

editor@blindnessandarts.com

We are based in:

Leicester, UK