supporting tiriti-based curriculum delivery in mainstream early ...

teachers and centres in Auckland, was always going to be a consideration and this
is discussed in detail later on in this chapter in section 3.3.4. Finally according to
Davidson and Tolich (1999) it is also imperative that data are faithfully reported.
Table 3.3 Expression of Ethical Principles in Case Studies.
Ethical Principle Questionnaire Case Studies
Do no harm The questionnaire was checked by
colleagues and the Māori Advisory
Committee, to ensure harm was unlikely.
Voluntary
participation and
informed consent
Respondents were able to choose whether
they answered all the questions, to
safeguard them from unwitting harm.
Questionnaires were given out to or were
picked up by respondents who then chose
whether or not to complete and return
them.
An information letter outlining the
research was attached to each
questionnaire.
Anonymity The questionnaire required all respondents
to remain anonymous. There were no
coding details on the questionnaire which
would enable respondents to be identified.
Confidentiality As respondents remained anonymous,
responses could not be linked to a specific
person. For this study, nobody asked that
responses be treated as confidential
although not all respondents answered all
questions.
Avoid deceit No deceit was involved.
Data analysed
and reported
faithfully
An information letter outlining the
research was attached to each
questionnaire.
Verbatim reporting of the qualitative
questions contributed to faithful reporting.
Peer checking of analysis occurred.
Teachers were co-researching their
own practice with each other and me.
Participants could withdraw up until
the time at which data collection was
completed.
Methodologies and methods were
discussed with the Māori Advisory
Committee.
The team of early childhood teachers
of each case study made a unanimous
decision to participate.
Information forms were given to each
potential participant and opportunity
was provided to ask questions prior to
participation
In action research participants may
wish to be known and get credit for
the research. Case Studies Two and
Three wanted their names and centres
to be known. Case Study One asked
for the use of initials.
Participants were visible, were named
and their actions were revealed unless
comments were made which I deemed
to be irrelevant to the focus on Tiritibased
curriculum, e.g. management
styles, administrative systems and
chit-chat, e.g. comments about their
own families. Notably, I did not
promise to keep the connections of
what was said secret from who said it
with Case Study Two and Case Study
Three as they wanted their connection
to the study to be expressly known.
No deceit was involved. All
questions asked by participants were
answered.
Transcripts research meetings and
draft case study report were given to
participants and there were
opportunities for corrections and
comment both verbally and written.
Peer checking of analysis occurred.
108