Cover not available
Part of
Ethical Issues in Applied Linguistics Scholarship
Edited by Peter I. De Costa, Amr Rabie-Ahmed and Carlo Cinaglia
[Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 7] 2024
► pp. 122–136

Chapter 7
The zero-sum game of beneficence

Conducting ethical critical inquiries in K-12 schools

| Lehigh University,
Critical research by nature is emancipatory, seeking to disrupt existing structures of systems, such as those in K-12 schools, that privilege particular groups while disenfranchising others. With such critical frameworks in research studies, however, competing interests among participants can emerge, exacerbating broader issues of privilege and oppression. Yet, applied linguists in the earliest years of their doctoral studies and careers are left ill-equipped to manage such conflicts and the ethical dilemmas they present. This chapter aims to lessen this oversight in training in two ways. First, the chapter draws upon the experiences that one critical applied linguist encountered in her research in schools. The researcher discovered that attempting to safeguard the well-being of all participants in a study is an untenable endeavor, especially when participants have disparate interests that contend with one another. Drawing upon illustrative examples from her research on multilingual learners with disabilities, the chapter lays bare the ethical dilemmas often present in critical inquiries and yet that do not surface in typical empirical publications. Second, the chapter offers recommendations for doctoral students and early-career applied linguists to consider as they conduct critical studies in schools with minoritized student groups.
Article outline
  • Ethics-in-context
  • Ethically important moments up close
    • Ethically important moment #1: Bureaucratic errors
    • Ethically important moment #2: Teacher burnout
  • Recommendations for researchers
    • 1.Count on competing interests
    • 2.Develop productive coping mechanisms
    • 3.Consider individuals over institutions
    • 4.Collaborate with transparency
    • 5.Do what you can, the best you can
  • Conclusion
  • Author queries
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (30)
References
Bernstein, K. A. (2019). Ethics in practice and answerability in complex, multi-participant studies. In D. S. Warriner & M. Bigelow (Eds.), Critical reflections on research methods: Power and equity in complex multilingual contexts (pp. 127–142). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Birks, M., Chapman, Y., & Francis, K. (2008). Memoing in qualitative research: Probing data and processes. Journal of Research in Nursing, 13(1), 68–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke, A. M., Morita-Mullaney, T., Singh, M. (2016). Indiana emergent bilingual student time to reclassification: A survival analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 53(5), 1310–1342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative research. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Costa, P. I. (2015). Ethics in applied linguistics research. In B. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource (pp. 245–257). Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Costa, P. I., Lee, J., Rawal, H., & Li, W. (2020). Ethics in applied linguistics research. In J. McKinley & H. Rose (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 122–130). Routledge.Google Scholar
García, S. B., Ortiz, A. A. (2006). Preventing disproportionate representation: Culturally and linguistically responsive prereferral interventions. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 38(4), 64–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guillemin, M. & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and ‘ethically important moments’ in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 261–280. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haas, E. M., & Esparza Brown, J. (2019). Supporting English learners in the classroom: Best practices for distinguishing language acquisition from learning disabilities. Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Haney, C., Banks, W., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69–97.Google Scholar
Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1998). The past and future of U.S. prison policy: Twenty-five years after the Stanford prison experiment. American Psychologist, 53(7), 709–727. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harklau, L. (2016). Bureaucratic dysfunctions in the education of Latino immigrant youth. American Journal of Education, 122(4), 601–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kangas, S. E. N. (2014). When special education trumps ESL: An investigation of service delivery for ELLs with disabilities. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 11(4), 273–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). “That’s where the rubber meets the road”: The intersection of special education and bilingual education. Teachers College Record, 119(7), 1–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Breaking one law to uphold another: Service provision for English learners with disabilities. TESOL Quarterly, 52(4), 877–910. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). English learners with disabilities: Linguistic development and educational equity in jeopardy. In X. Gao (Ed.), Second handbook of English language teaching (pp. 919–938). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020). Counternarratives of English learners with disabilities. Bilingual Research Journal, 43(3), 267–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kangas, S. E. N., & Cook, M. (2020). Academic tracking of English learners with disabilities in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 57(6), 2415–2449. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2022). Learning disabilities as external individual differences in second language acquisition. In V. De Wilde & C. Goroit (Eds.), Second language learning before adulthood: Individual differences in children and adolescents (pp. 9–30). De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kieffer, M. J., & Parker, C. E. (2016). Patterns of English learner student reclassification in New York City Public Schools. REL 2017–200. Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands. Retrieved on 25 Jue 2024 from [URL]
Komesaroff, P. (1995). From bioethics to microethics: Ethical debate and clinical medicine. In P. Komesaroff (Ed.), Troubled bodies: Critical perspectives on postmodernism, medical ethics and the body (pp. 62–86). Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Kubanyiova, M. (2008). Rethinking research ethics in contemporary applied linguistics: The tension between macroethical and microethical perspectives in situated research. The Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 503–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mellor, D. (2013). Critical theory of education. In J. Ainsworth (Ed.), Sociology of education: An a-to-z guide (Vol. 1, pp. 165–167). Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
National Research Act of 1974. 42 U.S.C. § 289 (1974).Google Scholar
Sahakyan, N., & Ryan, S. (2018). Long-term English learners across 15 WIDA states: A research brief (WIDA Research Brief No. RB-2018–1). WIDA at the Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Retrieved on 25 June 2024 from [URL]
Shin, N. (2020). Stuck in the middle: Examination of long-term English learners. International Multilingual Research Journal, 14(3), 181–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spall, S. (1998). Peer debriefing in qualitative research: Emerging operational models. Qualitative Inquiry, 4(2), 280–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sterling, S., & Gass, S. (2017). Exploring the boundaries of research ethics: Perceptions of ethics and ethical behaviors in applied linguistics research. System, 70, 50–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, S. B., & Quinn, S. C. (1991). Public health then and now: The Tuskegee syphilis study, 1932 to 1972: Implications for HIV education and AIDS risk education programs in the Black community. American Journal of Public Health, 81(11), 1498–1505. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. DOI logoGoogle Scholar