RESEARCH ETHICS: AN INVESTIGATION INTO WHY SCHOOL LEADERS AGREE OR REFUSE TO PARTICIPATE IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Author:

Brevik Lisbeth M.1

Affiliation:

1. University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Abstract

The present qualitative study investigates the reasons given by 236 Norwegian upper secondary school leaders when they either accepted or refused to take part in a research project. The analysis shows that those who agreed to participate gave two main reasons, while the range of reasons among those who refused was more diverse. Moreover, when making their decisions the school leaders considered the consequences for their schools and their teachers, and to some extent, their students. These findings are discussed in relation to consequence ethics and value judgments, in the hope of contributing to a renewed perspective on research ethics. There is a tendency to consider research ethics a matter of how researchers should treat their participants to safeguard the participants’ interests. However, the findings of the present study suggest that it is equally important to understand the participants’ perspectives, which will in turn help researchers provide the information needed to better inform, and hopefully recruit participants for research projects. Key words: accountability, consequence ethics, professional development, reading, research ethics.

Publisher

Scientia Socialis Ltd

Subject

Education

Reference27 articles.

1. Bentham, J. (1789, 2005). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. The 1789 version retrieved 1/03/2013, from http://www.econlib.org/library/Bentham/bnthPML.html

2. Busher, H., & James, N. (2012). The Ethical Framework of Research Practice. In: A. Briggs, M. Coleman, & M. Morrison (Eds.), Research Methods in Educational Leadership & Management, 3rd Ed. London: SAGE Publications, Ltd.

3. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

4. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design. Choosing Among Five Approaches, 3rd Ed. USA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

5. Elstad, E., Christophersen, K-A., & Turmo, A. (2012). The strength of accountability and teachers’ organisational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Educational Administration, 50 (5), 612 – 628.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3