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

the tape, but that is not what I meant” (D. 5/02/06), I decided that the ethical stance
was to go with participant‟s intended meanings. Other changes from transcripts
involved incorrect names being attributed to participants. It was not always
possible in the group meeting to clearly distinguish voices, and therefore, these
changes were made. However, there were further ethical issues in regards to
faithfully reporting the data that went beyond what could be considered
corrections, which are discussed next.
Presenting the draft reports of findings to participants highlighted the
ethical issue of faithfully reporting the data. Tolich and Davidson (1999b) state
that data belong to participants and they have the say over what happens to them.
Participants were able to question my contributions and interpretations as we
collaborated over the implementation of Tiriti-based pedagogy.
In Case Study One there were some concerns from the teachers over the
first draft I presented to the centre. They were particularly concerned about the
lack of context in the reports. Much of the analysis occurred through close reading
of transcripts of meetings. Teachers were familiar with the context within which
they made their comments, whereas I, as an outsider, was not. At times, therefore,
my interpretations required the additional details of the context within which
discussions had occurred and the teachers then provided these context and related
data.
In light of this, I was thoughtful about Zeni‟s (1998) point that I could
revise my analysis but also stay with my original viewpoint (as well as following
her suggestion of putting participants‟ alternate views in the appendix). However,
as I was interested in faithfully reporting data, I rewrote the original report and
included more details and complied with their concerns. Nevertheless, I felt some
anxiety about where to draw the line between being respectful to participants and
taking on board their perspective(s), and being true to my own analysis. In
practice, I was willing to make any necessary changes so I listened to each concern
raised by participants, and we talked about it until both of us were satisfied. This
enabled power to be collaboratively enacted.
The ethical issue of faithful reporting in regards to the conviction of my
analysis was particularly true about external professional development in Case
116