Qualitative research with primary school-aged children: ethical and practical considerations of evaluating a safeguarding programme in schools
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-01-2019-0005 |
| Pages | 194-204 |
| Published date | 05 September 2019 |
| Date | 05 September 2019 |
| Author | Vicki Jackson-Hollis |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Vulnerable groups,Children's services,Sociology,Sociology of the family,Children/youth,Parents,Education,Early childhood education,Home culture,Social/physical development |
Qualitative research with primary
school-aged children: ethical and practical
considerations of evaluating a
safeguarding programme in schools
Vicki Jackson-Hollis
Abstract
Purpose –The purposeof this paper is to explore some of the ethical and practicalchallenges of working with
primaryschool-aged childrento conduct qualitativeservice evaluationsregarding sensitive safeguarding topics.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper centres on the author’s learnings from conducting school-
based, task-assisted focus groups with 5–11 year olds. The reflections are drawn from notes made during
fieldwork, debrief discussions with evaluation colleagues and wider team debates. This was a consultative
participatory evaluation and the findings are situated within the wider literature around rights-based
approaches to research.
Findings –Using multi-method and creative approaches can facilitate young children to assent and dissent
from service evaluation in a school setting. However, the challenges of helping children understand
confidentiality are highlighted, as is the challenge for researchers in recognising and responding in situ to
disclosures. Using suitable and creative activities, this evaluation demonstrates that primary school children
can contribute meaningful data to assist with service development. However, the approach to collecting
these data from the youngest children needs careful consideration.
Practical implications –Researchers may need to adopt full participatory methods to better help children
understand the confidentiality bounds of research and to form views on the subject matter. More discussion
is needed in the wider safeguarding research literature to show how researchers have navigated the
challenges of handling disclosures.
Originality/value –This paper contributes to theliterature by providing examples of how to overcome issues
of children’s participation, consent and protection in service evaluation focussed on a sensitive topic.
Keywords Ethics, Children, Safeguarding, Research methods, Disclosures, Informed consent
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Children’s views and opinions should be central to the development and evaluation of
programmes and services designed for them.The 1989 United Nations Conventionon the Rights
of the Child (UN, 1989) is well-cited by authors who advocate including children in research and
evaluation (Beazley et al., 2011; Lundy and McEvoy, 2011). In particular, children’srightsto
“express their views, feelings and wishes in all matters affecting them, and to have their views
considered and taken seriously”(Article 12). However, a tension can exist between this right and
conceptions of children’s vulnerability, innocence and lack of awareness of their best interests
(Powell et al., 2016). This is heightened for research in the safeguarding sphere where sensitive
topics are discussed and participating children may be at greater risk of experiencing distress.
A host of papers have debated the ethical involvement of children in research, focussing on
issues such as children’s ability to give informed consent/assent (Cocks, 2006; Dockett and
Perry, 2011), their comprehension of research and what it involves (Gallagher et al., 2010;
Received 13 January 2019
Revised 30 April 2019
11 June 2019
Accepted 28 June 2019
The author would like to thank
Credit Suisse for their funding of
the evaluation on which this paper
is based, and ResearchAbility for
their help with designing the
consent methods and focus
group activities for children.
Vicki Jackson-Hollis is based in
the Evidence Team, National
Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Children (NSPCC),
Sheffield, UK.
PAGE194
j
JOURNAL OF CHILDREN'S SERVICES
j
VOL. 14 NO. 3 2019, pp. 194-204, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1746-6660 DOI 10.1108/JCS-01-2019-0005
To continue reading
Request your trial