The ethical issues arising in a study of this nature are complex and varied, not least because the primary focus of the research is the perceptions of young people. Eliciting the views of young people in the ways this study does, places them beyond mere objects or subjects of study, involving them in the research process itself. The agency this imbues the young people with has a direct impact on the ethical standpoint we take when examining the project. Christensen and Prout (2002) coined the term ethical symmetry for situations in which children as social actors or participants should be afforded the same ethical relationship by the researcher as s/he would if undertaking research with adults. So researchers employ the same ethical principles when working with children or adults, recognise that each ethical consideration for adults will have a counterpart for children and that any difference in carrying out the research with children should be allowed to arise and be addressed, rather than be assumed in advance.
Studies involving children invariably centre ethical discussions on issues around informed consent and whether young people are in a position to give it, age often being the deciding factor. A distinction is made between consent, often provided by adults on behalf of the children for which they have a duty of care (where an individual voluntarily agrees to take part in a research study, having been made aware of all pertinent information) and assent, granted by the child (agreement to be a subject in research). Although chronological age can be used to provide a distinction between adult and child, thereby allowing a decision to be made from whom informed consent can be drawn, Thompson (1992) suggests that a minimum threshold age for obtaining children's consent need not be an inflexible limitation and that provided information about the study and their role in it are given in an age and ability-appropriate manner, children are capable of providing consent for themselves. This sits well with the principle of ethical symmetry. As the ones charged with capturing the images upon which this study would hinge, the first participants would have greater demands and responsibilities placed upon them. In addition to using a camera in school, an activity they're commonly engaged in as part of lessons, they would also be taking it out of school, perhaps using it elsewhere including at home. For this reason, it was deemed appropriate to request parental approval in the form of a letter outlining details of the project which the prospective research participant would take home for parental consent to be provided. Pupils who participated subsequently, reviewing and discussing the images, would have a lower level of commitment (just a single interview and no concerns over use of a camera), so were allowed to provide consent themselves, since they were undertaking an activity broadly similar to activities they would experience in the normal course of school events.
The use of photography in this study introduces further layers of complexity. The research participants were provided with some guidance on what constitutes ethical practice when taking photographs of others. The subjects of the photographs may or may not be aware that they are being snapped and are unlikely to have been afforded the opportunity to provide consent to participation in this specific study. They will however have had the opportunity to consent to certain uses of their images, within the limits bounded by the school policy on the use of photographs. The storage and use of the images themselves should comply with guidance provided by the government through such bodies as the Information Commissioner's Office (Data Protection Good Practice Note: Taking Photographs in Schools, (PDF) 2010) and such agencies as Becta and also with local policies in force at the school.
In considering the interviews themselves, it must be recognised that there is a power imbalance in favour of the interviewer (me) arising from age (adult-child) and position (member of staff - student). The latter is offset somewhat by my role as a member of the support rather than teaching staff, affording me a slightly different relationship with the students. To further reduce the power imbalance, the interviewees were given the choice of where the interview should take place and whether or not they were comfortable responding alone or would rather be with a friend. (Further details in Appendix C)