Abstract
This introductory commentary on the special issue ‘Contemporary ethical tensions: Situated cases of ethical tensions when working with children and young people in educational contexts’ focuses on elaborating educational ethics as an emerging disciplinary area within the field of education and teacher education. In this context, we are using the term ‘educational ethics’ as a term to refer to a specialist area of applied ethics encompassing the study of the ethical complexity of working with children and young people across varying educational settings such as schools, early childcare, digital spaces, universities, civic places and research environments. Work by those arguing for and about educational ethics conceptualise the emerging subdiscipline to embrace, the history and development of educational policies with a particular focus on its potential or actual ethical implications for school administration, teachers, school students, school communities and others; the analysis and articulation of teacher ethical obligations including but not limited to codes of conduct and ethics in teaching; research relating to ethical conduct, manner and the moral life of schools, the investigation of models and theories of ethical beliefs and decision-making in relation to tertiary, school and child care education; and pedagogical dimensions, interventions or curriculum for teaching and learning professional ethics with initial and in-service teachers. (https://educationalethics.org/)
Educational ethics as a concept was discussed by Jerrold Coombs just over two decades ago to bring together a ‘field’ of ethics for education that encompassed an array of studies from teacher professionalism to the ethics of education. At that point, Coombs (1998) argued that educational ethics was defined by two approaches: it either sets forth an ethical theory or set of ethical principles for educators to follow and instructs them on how these principles are to be applied, or attempts to improve the reasoning educators engage in when deliberating about ethical problems. (p. 555)
The purpose of this special issue is to add to this body of work by contributing to both the academic and professional discussion through the development of approaches that emphasise the contemporary sociocultural dimensions of ethical tensions in schooling and educational contexts. In this sense, the papers presented aim to contribute to the field of educational ethics by privileging localised social, political, economic, cultural and geographic characteristics of tensions for the purposes of developing rich opportunities for exploring how ethical tensions in educational settings are both produced and reproduced. In doing this, we utilise Schouten and Brighouse’s (2015) discussion of the relationship between philosophy and evidence, particularly their argument on what distinguishes philosophical discussion based on a case study versus a thought experiment: Thought experiments are entirely stylized [original italics]. They are typically aimed at promoting the kind of reflective equilibrium that helps illuminate the exact content of some principle or value. Case studies, in contrast, elucidate what is at stake for an actual agent. They focus our attention on a specific and textured context, in which competing values merit consideration and must be weighed against one another. (Schouten and Brighouse, 2015: 18)
As Campbell (2003) writes in relation to educators’ work: teachers, make decisions and engage in practices that deliberately advance and reinforce core ethical principles through the intricacies of their curricular and pedagogical work with students and their interpersonal relationships in schools. And they do this within the context of a highly complex and morally layered environment. (p. 142)
However, it is this layered environment that is often relegated in studies of ethical tensions in schools. For example, sudden changes to student and community demographics, often resulting from shifts in national and international migration polices, resource limitations based on economic and political rationalities of the day that have prioritised school choice and privatisation, curriculum and policy reform initiatives increasingly governed by globalised policy networks at the expense of locally based and contextually nuanced initiatives and concerns, the international re-emergence of extreme nationalist and conservative politics, technological and media proliferation as well as the onset of the post-truth era and greater awareness of catastrophic global issues, such as climate change and sustainability now, all intersect to create these increasingly complex moral environments for schools and those working in them. This is not to suggest that traditional ethical considerations of the vulnerability of student stakeholders (age and developmental levels), pressures for collegial harmony when working with others and trust in the professionals who are tasked with working with children and young people, (Colnerud, 1997), do not warrant significant attention. Rather, we hope to supplement this line of inquiry by turning our attention to the situated nature of some of the ethical issues being experienced in contemporary school contexts around the globe, where complex contextual forces intersect to produce and reproduce ethical tensions for negotiation by those working in such contexts. We see this aim for the special issue as reflective of Meira Levinson’s articulation of a dimension of Alison Jagger and Theresa W. Tobin’s ethical project: to ‘redirect epistemology or moral justification from idealized and universal epistemological frames to ones that are non-ideal, naturalized, and contextually situated’ (Levinson, 2014: 37).
To better grasp such ‘non-ideal, naturalized and contextually situated’ frames, we turn to the social sciences, for example, where there is a substantial body of work on ethics that ‘falls outside the framework of formal philosophy’ and normative ethics (Haimes, 2002: 112). This work is both theoretical and empirical in nature and sees ethical issues as social issues and is therefore interested in placing ethicists and their field of study in a social wider context. This approach considers ethical dilemmas as social processes that shape, and are shaped by, broader historical, political, economic, institutional and cultural forces. The social science perspective also informs ethical design, review and conduct, with notable contributions coming from fields including sociology, cultural studies, anthropology and feminist theory (Haimes, 2002: 93–98; Hoeyer, 2006: 205–209), creating a more expansive view of the field; one that is not only concerned with universal rules and principles but also with situational considerations. This perspective sees ethical issues that formal philosophy considers the ‘same’ instead as issues that are contextually informed (Haimes, 2002: 107). The social sciences argue that ethical reasoning ‘does not float in a social vacuum’ but rather is ‘performed by concrete persons with their own moral convictions and situated in sociocultural contexts which often involve specific social roles and moral rules’ (Schicktanz et al., 2012: 131). They, therefore, provide both the theoretical interests and methodological resources to help ethicists connect issues to wider sociocultural debates. This allows for a greater consideration of the practical implications of ethical positions and the opportunity to generate new questions that can strengthen ethical reasoning (Hoeyer, 2006: 220). It is with these framings in mind that this special issue will provide a set of theoretical and empirical papers which will contribute to international understanding of the contemporary ethical tensions in schools and educational settings across the globe. We are pleased to present in the issue seven original contributions that speak to education research, teacher education, early childhood settings, primary and middle school education and philosophy for children networks. Each paper focuses on an account of a situation of ethical significance, underscoring the importance of studying ethics in education as a distinct scholarly focus. As Donald Schön (1983) argued more than 30 years ago, professional contexts are too complex to think of professional ethics as a simple application of general moral theories in contexts of practice. Responsiveness to the particularities of the practice context must be paired with an understanding and appreciation of general moral concepts and values.
The special issue opens with an interview between Professor Meira Levinson (Harvard University) and Daniella J. Forster, Amy McPherson and Samuel Douglas. In this interview, titled Democracy, Dilemmas and Educational Ethics, Levinson foregrounds the significant role those involved in education have in the decision making process around ethical dilemmas. Although ethical decision making is vital in educational policy and everyday schooling, there is still a lack of resources to help with the practical negotiation of these issues. Levinson argues that through collaborative dialogues with individuals from different perspectives, a culture of conversation can be developed that gives stakeholders in education the tools to think through ethical dilemmas. In the interview, she argues for the establishment of a subfield of philosophy called ‘educational ethics’, which is driven by questions that arise within and about education. This approach aims to facilitate a sense of agency in educators, policymakers and students around ethical issues in order to develop the capacity in adults and children alike, to exercise their civic rights and democratic responsibilities in educational contexts.
Rebecca Ipe’s contribution, Ethical Tensions in Designing Critical Ethnographic Research with Schoolchildren in Rural Karnataka, explores the ethical tensions encountered during preparation for ethnographic work in a rural district in Karnataka, India. Her scholarly work provides an ethical consideration of a larger project which aims to evaluate the School Development and Management Committees (SDMCs) established by the state government to solicit community input into public education. Ipe outlines the insufficiency of Western-centric approaches to doing research with majority-world children from marginalised backgrounds. In order to address the ethical issues specific to this population and context, the article proposes an intersectional framework that draws on the New Sociology of Childhood, subaltern studies and critical ethnography. Importantly, these approaches are all anchored by political agendas that recognise voices and address power imbalances that are often marginalised in research involving majority-world children. The theoretical and practical framework developed in this article aims to provide students from Karnataka with the space to exercise individual agency and to provide their own perspectives on community and parental involvement in their schooling through local SDMCs.
In the article by Áurea Vericat and Claudia Ruitenberg, titled Trauma-informed practices in early childhood education: Contributions, limitations, and ethical considerations, the authors rethink dominant approaches to early childhood trauma, which seek to provide coordinated support to children via a range of stakeholders including paediatricians, therapists, educators and policymakers. This approach is shaped by an awareness of the possible effects of trauma in the early years on a child’s biological, emotional, cognitive and emotional development. The authors, however, suggest some potential limitations of this framework, in particular, the way in which it seeks to standardise emotions and behaviours in an effort to socialise and normalise children. Vericat and Ruitenberg instead propose that early childhood educators should adopt a trauma-informed approach to care that prioritises the uniqueness of the child. This perspective helps counter medicalised and interventionist approaches to trauma that perpetuate the reductive figure of the ‘traumatised child’. Drawing on Levinas’ work, which sees those in power rendered responsible for the vulnerable other, this article argues for a more ethically responsible approach to early childhood trauma in education through an acknowledgement of children as unique, whole individuals.
Also drawing inspiration from Levinas, the paper Enabling Identity as an Ethical Tension in Community of Philosophical Inquiry with Children and Young Adults by Arie Kizel identifies how the mainstream hegemonic discourse often overshadows the voices of marginalised children in communities of philosophical inquiry. To counter this ethical issue in the philosophy for children community, Kizel proposes a discourse called ‘enabling identity’; one which seeks to create space for minority children to express their ideas and ask questions that interest them. Drawing on Levinas’ recognition of the importance of otherness and our responsibility to the other as well as Buber’s concept of mutuality as the basis of ethical dialogue, the author outlines a three-stage theoretical and practical–pedagogical model. Through recounts of conducting communities of philosophical inquiry using this model, the article demonstrates how this approach facilitates discussions that decentre the metanarrative of the dominant group and allows for multiple repressed narratives and identities to be acknowledged in a co-operative, empathetic, non-threatening and legitimising way.
Teaching Indigenous children in Taiwan: tensions, complexities, and opportunities, authored by Yulia Nesterova, critically reflects on the state of education for Indigenous children in Taiwan. Based on an ethnographic study, which includes interviews with Indigenous representatives, including teachers and community leaders, Nesterova demonstrates that despite the introduction of multicultural policies in the 1990s and more recent effort to promote reconciliation and transitional justice, curriculum and teaching practices in Taiwan remain bound up in hegemonic Han Chinese approaches and values. This means that the broader social and economic marginalisation of Indigenous Taiwanese people is reproduced in the classroom through discriminatory and assimilationist attitudes and practices. In response to the clear disadvantages the Taiwanese education system creates for Indigenous children, Nesterova’s work proposes a more ethical approach to pedagogy, curriculum, teacher training and policy in order to create a just and culturally responsive environment for these students.
The final submission by Rachel Buchanan, Erica Southgate and Shamus Smith, ‘The whole world’s watching really’: Parental and educator perspectives on managing children’s digital lives, considers the ethical complexities associated with the role of parents and teachers as custodians of children’s online lives. Also using empirical data generated through focus groups with parents and teachers of upper primary school students at three regional Australian schools, the article considers the awareness, knowledge and attitudes these adults have regarding children’s digital footprints. The analyses of the focus groups suggest that parents and educators are apprehensive about young people’s involvement in the ubiquitous and rapidly changing digital world. Their concerns for the children in their care were primarily around reputational risks and online safety, including cyberbullying. Notably, the participants were substantially less aware of the positive aspects of online activities, including the opportunities for young people to build their personal brands. The article also considers how unprepared these adults felt in terms of their responsibilities as digital custodians. To address this issue, Rachel Buchanan draws on UNICEF’s Ethical Research involving Children framework to develop a set of ethical principles to guide those in charge of helping children negotiate the risks and benefits of the virtual world.
In many ways, the papers collected for this special issue represent the everyday worlds of those of us whom work with children and young people in education settings. However, as Levinson and Fay (2016) write, educators and policy makers generally receive little support in thinking them through other than as technocratic challenges, especially in the current context of global education reform. These cases are treated as challenges of compliance, leadership, communication, data analysis, student support, or instruction. They are rarely treated as ethical challenges of equity, merit, respect, inclusion, fairness, or human rights–that is, as challenges that require educators and policy makers to think carefully about the values and moral principles at stake. (p. 2)
This issue was also identified by Campbell almost a decade earlier. While attention, to the moral dimensions of teaching and the ethical nature of the teacher’s professional responsibilities often seem to be taken for granted in both the academy and the practitioner communities, overshadowed by cognitive theories connected to teaching and learning, effective approaches to measurement and assessment, classroom management strategies, and other aspects that, while naturally important, are rarely viewed from a moral or ethical perspective. (Campbell, 2003: 358)
It remains therefore a challenge to engage policy makers, educators, school psychologists, research teams, philosophers, activists, concerned citizens and other professionals working in schools in the ethical complexity that permeates the social life of education settings. In this special issue, we present the potential of an approach to educational ethics that begins from the situated experiences and contexts of those working in a variety of educational settings with the aim of turning our ethical attention to children and young people in the here and now. In this sense, we see the potential of a situated approach to educational ethics as extending conceptual linkages and collaborations with a transformative politics of education by reaffirming the role of those working and researching in educational contexts as active moral agents in educational contexts where nuanced framings of ethical tensions are possible.