Ethical Guidelines

for Educational
Research
FIFTH EDITION (2024)
Published in 2024 by the British Educational Research Association

British Educational Research Association (BERA)

Elizabeth Meehan Suite
Regent House
1–6 Pratt Mews
London NW1 0AD

www.bera.ac.uk
[email protected]
020 4570 4265

Charity number: 1150237

Download

This document is available to download from

www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2024

Citation

If referring to or quoting from this document in your own writing, our preferred
citation is as follows.

British Educational Research Association [BERA]. (2024). Ethical Guidelines

for Educational Research (5th ed.). www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-
guidelines-for-educational-research-2024

Permission to share

This document is published under a creative commons licence:

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

For commercial use, please contact [email protected]

2 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Contents
Letter from the President 5

Fundamentals 7
Aspirations of educational researchers 9

Guidelines 11
Responsibilities to participants 11
Consent 13
Transparency 19
Right to withdraw 19
Incentives 20
Harm arising from participation in research 20
Privacy and data storage 22
Disclosure 24
Responsibilities to sponsors, clients, stakeholders and the environment 25
Methods 26
Responsibilities to the community of educational researchers 27
Responsibilities for publication and dissemination 30
Authorship 31
Scope and format 32
Responsibilities for researchers’ wellbeing and development 33

Historical note 35

Acknowledgements 39

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 3

 ABOUT BERA

BERA is a membership association and learned society committed to

advancing research quality, building research capacity and fostering research
engagement. We aim to inform the development of policy and practice by
promoting the best quality evidence produced by educational research.

Our vision is for educational research to have a profound and positive

influence on society. We support this by promoting and sustaining the work of
educational researchers. Our membership, which is more than 2,500 strong,
includes educational researchers, practitioners and doctoral students from the
UK and around the globe.

Founded in 1974, BERA has since expanded into an internationally renowned

association. We strive to be inclusive of the diversity of education research
and scholarship, and welcome members from a wide range of disciplinary
backgrounds, theoretical orientations, methodological approaches, sectoral
interests and institutional affiliations. We encourage the development of
productive relationships with other associations within and beyond the UK.

We run a major international conference each year alongside a diverse and

engaging series of events, and publish high quality research in our
peer-reviewed journals, reports, book series and the groundbreaking BERA
Blog. We recognise excellence through our awards and fellowships, provide
grants for research, support the career development of our members, and
nurture an active peer community organised around networks, forums and
special interest groups.

BERA is a registered charity (no. 1150237) and is a company limited by guarantee,

registered in England and Wales (company no. 08284220). We are governed by
an elected council and managed by a small office team based in London.

4 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Letter from the President
Dear colleague,

On behalf of the Council of the British Educational Research Association

(BERA), I am very pleased to present to you the fifth edition (2024) of our
Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. I would like to thank all of the BERA
members and professional office staff whose commitment and diligence have
enabled the publication of this edition to mark the 50th anniversary of the
founding of BERA.

As a learned society we are dedicated to the promotion of research as vital for

democracy and social wellbeing in improving knowledge and understanding
of all aspects of education. Fundamental to all our work is the importance
of recognising and tackling power differentials and structural inequalities
affecting our members and the wider educational research community. The
recent Education: The State of the Discipline initiative has highlighted these
issues and our Strategic Plan 2021–2026 sets out the steps we are taking to
address them. To this end, we promote respect for all those who engage in
and with educational research and unequivocally celebrate the diversity of
approaches. These guidelines are designed to enable researchers to conduct
their work to the highest ethical standards in any and all contexts. In turn, this
will require researchers to take reflexive and situated approaches, mindful of
the linguistic, political and cultural aspects of their particular research settings.

Since publication of the first edition of the guidelines in 1992, BERA

has continued to review them to ensure their relevance to the needs of
educational researchers navigating a complex and rapidly changing world.
In developing this fifth edition we have reflected on issues of inclusion, and
these updated guidelines acknowledge the Equality Act 2010 and the impact
of structural inequalities throughout research, putting particular responsibility
on researchers to guard against inadvertently compounding marginalisation.
The review and associated updates recognise that all topics and groups have
a right to be considered researchable, but also emphasise that duty of care
to one another is a responsibility for all researchers, especially towards the

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 5

next generation of researchers. These guidelines emphasise researchers’
responsibilities not only to protect participants but also to promote their
rights to participation, particularly marginalised and vulnerable groups,
so maximising inclusivity; for example, assent as well as consent is now
included. Crucially, and following BERA’s wider work in this area, the updated
guidelines acknowledge the role research can play in promoting environmental
sustainability. I recommend reading the historical note at the end of this
edition for more information on the process involved in conducting the review.

Our aim was to produce guidelines that are clear and helpful to anyone
undertaking educational research, including those new to the field. We have
also provided footnotes with links to current developments in the use of
artificial intelligence and social media as well as developments in the support
of educational researchers. We expect researchers to consult more specialist
literature relevant to the tradition of research or specific methods as needed,
so as to ensure that their research is undertaken in a way that is both valid
and ethically appropriate. BERA will continue to promote the highest quality
educational research through our special interest groups and programme of
activities. I hope you will find these a helpful supplement to this latest edition
of the Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research.

With best wishes,

Vivienne Baumfield

President, BERA

April 2024

6 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Fundamentals
The intended audience for these guidelines is anyone undertaking educational
research – whether their job description includes research, or they conduct
research within the field (for example, while studying for a qualification or
with the intention of improving practice). This includes both independent
researchers and practitioners based in educational institutions of any kind.

The Association expects its members to conduct themselves in a way

that reflects its vision, aims and ethical values (as stipulated in the British
Educational Research Association [BERA] code of conduct1). For this reason,
BERA recommends that members use these guidelines (and/or other ethical
guidelines, where relevant or required), and expects that they will adhere to
their spirit and underlying principles (described later) and apply them with
integrity in their research activities so that their actions can be seen to be
ethical, justifiable and sound. The Association hopes that these guidelines will
attract widespread consideration and use by those engaged in carrying out,
sponsoring or using educational research who are not BERA members.

For a lot of educational research activity, the application of these guidelines

will be straightforward, but in some cases dilemmas may arise. We recognise
that since few ethical dilemmas have obvious or singular solutions, researchers
will take different approaches to resolving them. Certain dilemmas are
flagged up within these guidelines, but others that cannot be covered here
will also arise. Guidelines that state what action ‘should’ be taken may not
be appropriate to all circumstances; in particular, different cultural contexts
are likely to require situated judgments. Furthermore, some kinds of research
may require ethical clearance from other bodies, for example, the National
Health Service (NHS), which commit researchers to acting in accordance with
their guidelines. In sum, and for each research project, researchers will need
to devise specific ethical courses of action which may incorporate elements
from more than one set of guidelines – those of both the NHS and BERA,
for example. To do this, they may draw on ethical approaches that reflect

1 British Educational Research Association [BERA]. (2023). BERA handbook: Member code of
conduct. www.bera.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Code-of-Conduct-2023.pdf

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 7

a range of philosophical orientations (virtue ethics, or deontological ethics,
for example). It is adherence to the spirit of the guidelines that we consider
most important to protect all who are involved in or affected by a piece of
research. In addition to these guidelines, support and links to related resources
are provided. 2

We recommend that at all stages of a project – from planning through conduct

to reporting – educational researchers undertake wide consultation to identify
relevant ethical issues, including listening to those in the research context/site(s),
stakeholders and any sponsors. This means that ethical decision-making
becomes an actively deliberative, ongoing and iterative process of assessing and
reassessing the situation and issues as they arise. Good researchers are reflexive
and consider both general issues and the specifics of each research situation.

BERA recommends that researchers bring these guidelines to the attention

of those they work with – including participants, stakeholders, sponsors and
commissioners of research, educational institutions and other organisations –
and encourage and support those contacts to engage with them. BERA hopes
that these guidelines will be helpful to students enrolled on education and
research degrees, and recommends that local ethical review procedures make
use of them in support of their own work.

The guidelines are intended to promote active and concrete responses

following from a deliberation of the issues. Researchers should – in their
research proposals, reports, funding applications, work with educational
institutions and so on – explicitly indicate how they are adhering to those
points included in these guidelines that are salient to their work.

It is recognised that educational researchers whose work is conducted under

the auspices of an educational institution will be required to seek ethical review
and clearance from that institution. These guidelines are, therefore, intended
to inform and support researchers as they develop their ethical thinking and
practice. BERA recommends that checks and balances are in place through the
use of critical friends for ethical appraisal of all educational research studies.

2 BERA publishes case studies that illustrate how researchers have put ethical guidelines and
principles into practice within specific projects and contexts. www.bera.ac.uk/publication-series/
research-ethics-case-studies

8 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 ASPIRATIONS OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHERS

Educational researchers aim to extend knowledge and understanding in all

areas of educational activity and from a wide range of perspectives, including
those of learners, educators, policymakers and the public. The Association
recognises that the community of educational researchers is multidisciplinary
and diverse in its application of research approaches and philosophical
positions. Concepts such as ‘data’, ‘reliability’, ‘validity’, ‘credibility’,
‘trustworthiness’, ‘subjectivity’ and ‘objectivity’ may therefore be understood
and legitimately applied in different ways. Ethical review processes thus need
to be conducted in an open-minded and inclusive manner.

These guidelines do not pre-empt, judge or constrain, directly or indirectly,

anyone’s choice of research approach.

The Association believes that all educational research should be conducted

within an ethic of respect for: people; knowledge; the quality of educational
research; the environment; and academic freedom. We believe there should be
an ethic of care for all involved in educational research by and for researchers.
Trust is a further essential element within the relationship between researcher
and researched, as is the expectation that researchers will accept responsibility
for their actions. These are the collective principles that we ask members
and those using the guidelines to commit to and engage with when making
decisions in their research.

Applying an ethic of respect may reveal tensions or challenges. For example,

there will usually be a need to make decisions about how best to balance
research aspirations, societal concerns, institutional expectations and
individual rights. It is recommended that researchers undertake an analysis,
beginning at the earliest stage of research planning, to consider how these
various tensions or challenges might best be addressed in the research design
and throughout the entire research process.

In guiding researchers on their conduct within this framework, the Association

sets out its guidelines under the following five headings.

• Responsibilities to participants
• Responsibilities to sponsors, clients, stakeholders and the environment

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 9

• Responsibilities to the community of educational researchers
• Responsibilities for publication and dissemination
• Responsibilities for researchers’ wellbeing and development.

Finally, since the guidelines were first published in 1992, there has been an
explosion in writing about ethics in educational research. This publication
should be seen as providing a set of guidelines intended to cover the broad
field of educational research. Rather than produce much longer guidelines
with numerous references to the specialist literature, we aimed to produce
guidelines that are clear and helpful to anyone undertaking educational
research, including those new to the field. Depending on the tradition of
research (for example, ethnography, digital research) and specific methods
being employed (for example, interviews, multimodal data analysis),
researchers have a responsibility to consult more specialist literature as
needed, so as to ensure that their research is undertaken in a way that is both
valid and ethically appropriate.

10 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Guidelines
RESPONSIBILITIES TO PARTICIPANTS

1. BERA believes that educational researchers should operate within an ethic

of respect for all persons – including themselves – involved in or affected
by the research they are undertaking. Individuals should be treated fairly,
sensitively, and with dignity and freedom from prejudice, in recognition of
both their rights and their differences arising from age, gender, sexuality,
ethnicity, class, nationality, cultural identity, partnership status, faith,
disability, political belief or any other significant characteristic.

2. The Association reminds researchers of the protected characteristics

as defined by the Equality Act 2010 – age, gender reassignment, being
married or in a civil partnership, being pregnant or on maternity leave,
disability, race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin,
religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. Beyond this, the Association
expects researchers to be mindful of the ways in which structural
inequalities – including those listed above but also socio-economic
status, parental status and neurodiversity – affect all social relationships,
including those that are formed in the course of research. Where
relevant, attention should be paid to the ways in which such inequalities
specifically affect vulnerable individuals and their relationships.
Sensitivity and attentiveness towards such structural issues are important
aspects of researchers’ responsibilities to participants at all stages of
research, including reporting and publication.

3. Participants in research may be actively or passively involved in such

processes as observation, experiment, auto/biographical reflection,
survey or test. They may be collaborators or colleagues in the research
process, or they may simply be implicated in the context in which a
research project takes place. (For example, in a teacher’s or lecturer’s
research into their own professional practice, students and/or colleagues
will be part of the context but will not themselves be the focus of that

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 11

 research.) It is important for researchers to take account of the rights and
interests of those indirectly affected by their research, and to consider
whether action is appropriate – for example, they should consider
whether it is appropriate to provide information or obtain informed
consent. In rare cases – such as some politically volatile settings, or
where researchers are investigating illegal activity – covert research can
be defensible.

4. Digital/online research, as well as the use of artificial intelligence, is a

rapidly developing area, therefore conventions as to what constitutes
good ethical practice are not as well established as in most other areas
of educational research.3 Nevertheless, the fundamental principles apply.
Where research draws on social media and online communities, it is
important to remember that digital information is typically generated by
individuals. Researchers should not assume that the names given
and/or identities presented by participants in online forums or other
sites are ‘real’, but should consider whether and how these potential
participants might be traceable and indeed whether it can be proven that
they exist at all.

5. Where an organisation shares its data with researchers, those researchers

have a responsibility to account for how and with what consent these
data were gathered; they must also consider the authorship of the
data and who owns them and, consequently, whether it is necessary
to approach the relevant individuals for consent concerning their use.
Researchers should keep up to date with changes in data use regulations
and advice, which are often specific to particular jurisdictions.

6. Researchers have a responsibility to determine the most relevant and

useful ways of informing participants about the outcomes of research in
which they are or were involved. Researchers should consider whether
and how to engage with participants at the conclusion of the research,
for example, by debriefing them in an audience-friendly format or by

3 We recommend reference to the Association of Internet Researchers ethical guidance,

which is regularly updated, has international applicability and is responsive to technological
developments. https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf

12 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 eliciting feedback on the findings. Should conflicting interpretations
arise, researchers should normally ensure when reporting the research
that participants’ views are presented. Researchers may wish to offer
participants copies of any publications arising from projects in which
they have participated, and/or to produce reports or summaries
specially tailored for the research context, taking into consideration
potential subsequent uses of this material, including by the participants’
institutions. A project website can be a way of reaching and engaging
with participants and others.

Researchers also have a responsibility to put in place ways of maximising

the benefits and minimising the likelihood of any potential harms to
participants, sponsors, the community of educational researchers and
educational professionals and the environment more widely. At times,
some benefits to certain parties may be compromised in order to achieve
other goals, but these compromises should be justifiable and, where
possible, explicitly accounted for. Particular care may be needed when
the researcher is also an ‘insider’.

7. Researchers should not undertake work for which they are not competent.

Consent
8. It is normally expected that participants’ voluntary informed consent
to be involved in a study will be obtained at the start of the study, and
that researchers will remain sensitive and open to the possibility that
participants may wish, for any reason and at any time, to withdraw their
consent. The Association takes voluntary informed and ongoing consent
to be the condition by which participants understand and agree to their
participation, and the terms and practicalities of it, without any duress.
It should be made clear to participants that they can withdraw at any
point without needing to provide an explanation – this is detailed in
paragraphs 31 and 32 below. Researchers should be alert to non-verbal
signs that individuals who previously consented to participate may
no longer wish to. In such circumstances, renewed consent should
be sought.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 13

9. Researchers should do what they can to ensure that all potential
participants understand, as well as they are able, what is involved in a
study. They should be told why their participation is desired, what, if
anything, they will be asked to do, what will happen to the data they
provide and how and to whom the data will be reported. They also
should be informed about the retention, sharing and any possible
secondary uses of the data. Where appropriate, researchers who are
BERA members may include a declaration of membership in information
sheets and consent forms, to make explicit the fact that members are
expected to follow BERA guidance as part of the Association’s code of
conduct (which contains a complaints procedure that may be helpful).4

10. Participants may be willing to take part in research even though they are
unable to be fully informed about the implications of their participation
– perhaps due to their unfamiliarity with research, a lack of ability to
understand, or their circumstances. In these situations, researchers and
participants should negotiate consent within relationships of mutual
trust, the credibility of which largely depends upon the integrity and
trustworthiness of the researcher.

11. The institutions and settings within which the research is set also have
an interest in the research, and ought to be considered in the process of
gaining consent. Researchers should think about whether they should
approach gatekeepers before directly approaching participants, and
whether they should adopt an institution’s own ethical approval and
safeguarding procedures; this is usually a requirement. (Furthermore,
in some circumstances researchers may have a statutory duty to
disclose confidential information to relevant authorities; see paragraph
48.) Particularly when researching in more than one language or
culture, researchers should consider the effects of translation and/or
interpretation on participants’ understandings of what is involved.

12. In many cases the producers of publicly accessible data may not have
considered the fact that they might be used for research purposes, and

4 BERA. (2023). BERA handbook: Member code of conduct. www.bera.ac.uk/wp-content/

uploads/2023/10/Code-of-Conduct-2023.pdf

14 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 it should not be assumed that such data are available for researchers
to use without consent. Researchers should be attuned to differences
between, for example, policy documents, governing body minutes and
charitable trust reports that are written with the expectation that they
are available for public use or accountability, and data that may appear
to be in the public domain yet are produced for a range of purposes
(for example, in social media, online discussion forums, face-to-face
presentations or meetings). Seeking consent would not normally be
expected for data that have been produced expressly for public use. There
are a range of views, however, as to whether those in online communities
perceive their data to be public or private, even when intellectual
property rights are waived. Therefore, consent is an issue to be addressed
with regard to each and any online data source, with consideration given
to the presumed intent of the creators of online content, the extent
to which such content identifies individuals or institutions, and the
sensitivity of the data.

13. Consideration should be given to whether and how best to approach

online communities (for example, through members, gatekeepers or
moderators), or those involved in face-to-face public events and spaces,
in order to inform them about the intended research.

14. When working with secondary or documentary data, the sensitivity of

the data, who created them, the intended audience of their creators,
their original purpose and intended uses in the research are all
important considerations. If secondary data concerning participants
are to be reused, ownership of the datasets should, if possible, be
determined, and the owners consulted to ascertain whether they
can give consent on behalf of the participants. Sometimes it may be
deemed appropriate to accept consent from hosts of the data, such as a
depository on behalf of contributors.

15. It is accepted that gaining consent from all concerned in certain spaces
(face-to-face or virtual, past or present) is not always feasible; in such
circumstances, attempts to make contact should be documented.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 15

16. In circumstances in which some members of a group (such as students in
a class or their parents/guardians) have not given consent to participate,
for example in class observation, researchers should decide whether
this was an active refusal of consent, in which case they would need
to respect this and find a practical solution. For those whom it is not
possible to contact to obtain consent, a decision should be taken as to
how it might be appropriate to proceed, in conjunction with gatekeepers
or other stakeholders.

17. In ethnographic and observational studies, the level of analysis in

group-focused research should be taken into account where some
members of the group refuse consent. If the research aims to understand
the roles of individuals within the group, then these non-consenting
members must not be included in the research. However, it may still
be feasible and ethically permissible to record consenting individuals’
interactions with anonymised non-consenting individuals.

18. Specific issues also arise with respect to consent within large-scale
research across multiple settings. Institutional leaders may agree to take
part, acting as gatekeepers on behalf of members (such as teachers and
students in schools). In order to ensure that all participants are as fully
informed as possible about the benefits and potential costs of the study,
researchers should offer both information and support. This may result
in participants exercising their right to opt out within the parameters of
the intervention. Where stratified random sampling is used, it may be
appropriate to select additional participants so that where institutions or
individuals withdraw, they can be replaced.

19. An important consideration is the extent to which a researcher’s reflective

research into their own practice impinges upon others – for example, in
the case of power relationships arising from the dual roles of teacher/
lecturer/manager and researcher, and their impact on students and
colleagues. Dual roles may also introduce explicit tensions in areas such
as confidentiality. These may be addressed appropriately by, for example,
making the researcher role very explicit, involving an independent third
party in the research process and seeking agreement for politically

16 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 controversial research. Researchers who are researching their own
practice should also consider how to address any issues arising as a
result of collecting data for different purposes – for example, using data
collected for evaluation purposes for research purposes, or vice versa.

20. In some cases, potential participants may not be in a social position

vis-à-vis the researcher that enables them to give voluntary informed
consent. This can occur, for example, when the researcher and potential
participant are family members, or if the researcher is the participant’s
teacher/lecturer. Researchers need to consider carefully how to deal with
such situations and, if possible, should reassure potential participants
that non-participation is entirely acceptable.

21. Researchers using auto/biographical approaches and autoethnography

need to consider how their work implicates other people, and what
the consequences may be for individuals who, although not directly
involved in a study, may be identifiable through their relationship with
the researcher or other participants; consent may need to be sought from
these individuals in some cases.

22. BERA expects UK researchers to apply the same ethical principles to

research they undertake outside of and within the UK. The application
of these principles in different social, cultural and political contexts
may require careful negotiation, adaptation and sensitivity, and there is
ultimately no substitute for the integrity and ethical code of the individual
researcher. In some countries it is advisable to work with a local person
as a co-researcher/co-investigator in order to establish adequate levels of
trust with prospective local participants. Appropriate permission should
be sought from relevant authorities (such as community or religious
leaders or local government officials) in cultures that adopt a collective
approach to consent. However, in such cultures it should not be assumed
that individuals cannot make their own informed decisions about
whether or not to take part in the research.

23. Principles of consent apply to children and young people as well as to

adults. This is termed assent for those under the age of legal consent

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 17

 in the setting/culture. However, children of different ages vary in their
capacity to make informed decisions. BERA endorses the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC);5 the best interests of
the child are the primary consideration, and children who are capable
of forming their own views should be granted the right to express
those views freely, and have them taken into consideration, in all
matters affecting them, commensurate with their age and maturity.
Information sheets and consent forms should be appropriately designed
for participants who may differ in such factors as age, reading ability
and attention span. Researchers should be aware of issues to do with
neurodiversity, as referenced in paragraph 2.

24. Researchers following the UNCRC will take into account the rights and
duties of those who have legal responsibility for children, such as those
who act in guardianship (for example, parents) or as ‘responsible others’
(that is, those who have responsibility for the welfare and wellbeing of
the participants, such as social workers). This may involve gaining the
consent of those responsible for children, such as parents, guardians or
others in loco parentis.

25. In the case of potential participants whose capacity, age or

circumstances may limit the extent to which they can be expected
to agree voluntarily to participate, researchers should fully explore
ways in which they can be supported to participate with assent in the
research. Care should be taken to ensure that documentation and
oral information is as intelligible as possible. In such circumstances,
researchers should also seek the collaboration and approval of those
responsible for such participants.

26. Generally, opt-in procedures for gaining consent are preferred. However,
opt-out procedures are acceptable in some circumstances. Researchers
have a responsibility to consult local legislation and consider local
practice if opt-out procedures are envisaged.

5 www.unicef.org/child-rights-convention

18 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Transparency
27. Researchers should aim to be open and honest with participants and
other stakeholders, avoiding non-disclosure unless their research design
specifically requires it in order to ensure that the appropriate data are
collected, or so that the researcher or participants are not put at risk.
Decisions to use non-disclosure in research should be the subject of full,
principled deliberation and subsequent disclosure in reporting.

28. Principles of consent also apply to possible reuse of data. There are
two relevant categories of such reuse: secondary data analysis by the
same research team to address new research questions; or the sharing
of the dataset for use by other researchers. In both cases, if data may
be reused, this should be made clear when gaining initial consent. It is
recommended that only anonymised data should be archived for sharing
with other researchers.

29. Where research has been sponsored or commissioned, this should be

made explicit to potential participants and other stakeholders, and in
reports of the research and other publications, in the interests of both
transparency and acknowledgement.

30. Researchers should not undertake work in which they can be perceived
to have a material conflict of interest, or in which self-interest or
commercial gain might compromise the validity of the research. Any
potential conflicts of interest should be declared to relevant parties at
various stages of the research, including in any publications.

Right to withdraw
31. Researchers should recognise the right of all participants to withdraw
from the research for any or no reason, and participants should
be informed of this right and how to exercise it. In most cases the
appropriate course of action will simply be for the researchers to accept a
participant’s decision to withdraw, but there are circumstances in which
researchers can appropriately discuss with the participant whether a
course of action might be taken that would enable the participant to

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 19

 re-engage. Any decision to attempt to persuade a participant to re-engage
should be taken with care, and coercion, duress of any form or additional
incentives (see paragraph 33) must not be used. However, in cases in
which participants are required by a contractual obligation to participate
(for example, when mandated as part of their employment to facilitate an
evaluation study), researchers may have proper recourse to a third party
(the employing authority in this example) to request compliance.

32. In online research contexts, if authors of postings or other material

withdraw or delete data before the end of data collection, then these
data should not be used in research. However, since it will not be
possible for researchers to identify such withdrawals after the end of data
collection, a note could be included in publications that the data were ‘as
made available at the [stated] date of harvesting’.

Incentives
33. Researchers’ use of incentives to encourage participation should be
commensurate with good sense, such that the level of incentive does not
impinge on the free decision to participate. The use of incentives should
be acknowledged in any reporting of the research.

Harm arising from participation in research

34. Ethical research design and implementation aim to put participants at
their ease and to avoid making excessive demands on them. In advance
of data collection, researchers have a responsibility to think through their
duty of care in order to recognise potential harms, and to prepare for
and be in a position to minimise and manage any distress or discomfort
that may arise. Researchers should immediately reconsider any actions
occurring during the research process that appear to cause emotional or
other harm. The more vulnerable the participants, for whatever reasons,
the greater the responsibilities of the researcher for their protection.

35. Researchers should make known to the participants (or their guardians
or responsible others) any predictable disadvantage or harm potentially
arising from the process or reporting of the research. Any unexpected

20 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 harm to participants that arises during the research should be brought
immediately to their attention, or to the attention of their guardians
or responsible others as appropriate. Researchers should take steps to
minimise the effects of research designs that advantage or are perceived
to advantage one group of participants over others. For example, in
an experimental design (including a randomised controlled study), the
intervention made available to one group, while being unavailable to the
control or comparison group, may be viewed as desirable. In mitigation,
for example, an intervention found to be effective can typically be offered
to control groups after the end of a trial.

36. The rights of individuals should be borne in mind along with any
potential social benefits of the research, and the researcher’s right to
conduct research in the service of public understanding. The researcher’s
obligations to the wider research community and to the public good may,
in some circumstances, outweigh the researcher’s obligations to act in
accordance with the wishes of those in positions of economic, legal or
political authority over the participants (such as employers, headteachers
or government officials).

37. Researchers should recognise concerns relating to the time and effort that
participation in some research can require – the long-term involvement
of participants in some ethnographic studies, for example, and the
repeated involvement of particular participants in survey research or in
testing for research or evaluation purposes. Researchers should consider
the impact of their research on the lives and workloads of participants,
particularly when researching vulnerable or over-researched populations.
Equally, researchers should do what they can to ensure that relevant
individuals and communities are not, intentionally or otherwise, excluded
from participation in their research.

38. During the research process (especially in longitudinal or ethnographic

studies), if unforeseen consequences arise – in terms of human
relationships or life experiences, for example – it may be appropriate to go
back to the participants, gatekeepers or sponsors to renegotiate consent.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 21

Privacy and data storage
39. Appropriate treatment of participants’ data is required for the conduct
of ethical research. Researchers should recognise the entitlement of
both institutions and individual participants to privacy. This could
involve anonymisation, pseudonymisation or employing ‘fictionalising’
approaches when reporting; when using such approaches researchers
should fully explain how and why they have done so. However, in some
circumstances individual participants, or their guardians or responsible
others, may willingly waive their right to confidentiality and anonymity.
Researchers should recognise the right of participants to be identified as
the originator of their own work if they so wish.

40. Anonymity may not always be possible. For example, if conducting

fieldwork within a small, close-knit community, it may be impossible
to prevent some members of that community becoming aware – either
through observation or because participants discuss it with them – of
some details about the research that is being conducted. Similarly,
when researching a very well-known institution, it may be possible
for some readers to infer the identity of that institution even from
an account that attempts to anonymise it. Approaches to this issue
differ according to the type of research being undertaken; for instance,
the maintenance of confidentiality and anonymity is not considered
the norm for research using historical or archival data, nor is it
generally achievable for autoethnographic work published under the
researcher’s name.

41. Anonymity may also need to be reconsidered in the context of some

visual methodologies. For instance, the study of facial expressions and
gestures and the increasing prevalence of video and multimodal data
raise questions about whether concealing identities is always feasible
or appropriate. Researchers need to discern an ethical course of action
here – one that secures clear agreement about anonymity and about
subsequent use of the data. Researchers need to be aware that visual
material, in particular, can be misused by others, and should take steps
to prevent this as far as possible.

22 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

42. Sponsors may require researchers to make anonymised (potentially,
even non-anonymised) data available, for the purposes of linking with
other datasets. It is important that in seeking consent from participants,
researchers are explicit about what kinds of data (if any) may be shared
with others and whether or not these data are anonymised.

43. In cases where participants are anonymised, researchers should be aware

of the possible consequences to participants should it prove possible for
them to be identified by association or inference. Researchers should take
especial care to minimise the chances of identification if this might lead
to participants being harmed in any way.

44. Researchers need to be aware that participants’ understandings of their

level of privacy in a particular place, especially in online spaces, may be
inaccurate. Ambiguity about privacy within some online communities in
which sensitive or illegal topics are being discussed, or material shared,
raises further ethical concerns. Relatedly, researchers should consider
the question of what online content, and in what circumstances, they
could be obligated to report to relevant authorities and/or online service
providers, bearing in mind any agreements entered into regarding
confidentiality and anonymity (see paragraphs 48 and 49, on disclosure).
Researchers gathering data in such contexts should inform potential
participants about such possibilities.

45. Researchers must comply with the legal requirements in relation to the
storage and use of personal data as stipulated in the UK by the Data
Protection Act 2018 and any subsequent related legislation or regulations,
such as the legislative amendments to accommodate the post-Brexit
changes to UK data privacy law. Researchers must have participants’
explicit permission to gather, store and disclose their personal
information to third parties, and are required to ensure that such parties
are permitted to have access to that information. They are also required
to confirm the identity of such persons to their own satisfaction and
must keep a record of any disclosures. Both the General Data Protection
Regulation (GDPR) and UK Data Protection Act define personal data as
‘any information relating to an identified or identifiable person’, and

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 23

 require that sensitive personal data are given additional protection.
Record-keeping and reporting of breaches are mandatory and compliance
must be proven.

46. Researchers should ensure that data are kept securely, and that the
form of any publication or dissemination (for example, at a conference)
does not directly or indirectly lead to a breach of agreed confidentiality.
Accepted practices for keeping data secure change over time but currently
include: the use of secure computer networks; ensuring that hard
copy data are stored under lock and key on secure premises; digitising
resources and destroying the originals; the use of password protection
and/or data encryption for electronic data; using courier or secure
electronic transfer when moving data; and ensuring that any third-party
users of the data agree to an appropriate data-sharing agreement.
Researchers should be aware that some online services, such as
automated transcription, may compromise confidentiality.

47. In an international context, researchers should be aware that it may not

be possible to protect data stored within some jurisdictions from scrutiny.

Disclosure
48. There are circumstances in which confidentiality may need to be broken,
and information sheets and consent forms should state this. Researchers
who judge that adherence to agreements they have made with
participants about confidentiality is likely to result in illegal or harmful
actions should carefully consider making disclosure to the appropriate
authorities. In some cases, such as revelations of abuse or proposed
acts of terrorism, researchers may be under statutory duty to disclose
confidential information to relevant authorities. Researchers should
seek advice from a relevant responsible person before proceeding to
disclosure if and when appropriate (for example, a student undertaking
research should seek advice from their supervisor[s]). Insofar as it
does not undermine or obviate the disclosure, or jeopardise researcher
safety, researchers should inform the participants, or their guardians or
responsible others, of their intentions and reasons for disclosure.

24 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

49. At all times, the decision to override agreements on confidentiality should
be taken after careful and thorough deliberation. In such circumstances,
it is in the researcher’s interests to make contemporaneous factual and
dated notes on decisions and the reasoning behind them.

RESPONSIBILITIES TO SPONSORS, CLIENTS, STAKEHOLDERS AND

THE ENVIRONMENT

50. A stakeholder of research is considered to be any person or body who

has a direct interest in its framing and success. A sponsor of research
is considered to be a stakeholder that funds or commissions research
(such as a research charity or philanthropic foundation, a national
research council or other government body, or a commercial or non-
governmental organisation), or that facilitates it by allowing and enabling
access to resources needed to carry out the research, such as data and
participants (for example, an examinations body).

51. Written contracts are considered the norm for funded or commissioned
research. Such agreements should, wherever possible and especially in the
case of publicly funded research, take into account the rights of the public
within a democracy to have open access to the results of research. They
should minimally cover: the purpose of the research; the research methods
to be used; any conditions of access to data or participants; ownership
of data; the researcher’s right to publish; requirements for reporting and
dissemination (including the need for transparency); and deadlines for
completion of the work; and accounting for the use of funds. In recognition
of the dynamics of research, agreements should also include provision for
negotiating changes sought by either the researchers or the sponsors.

52. It is in researchers’ interests that respective responsibilities and

entitlements should be agreed with sponsors at the outset. Where the
sponsor acts essentially as a host or facilitator for research, researchers
should, at the very least out of courtesy, inform them of the work they
propose to undertake. For example, a group of teachers engaging in a
process of action research as part of curriculum renewal should inform
the school management of their intentions.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 25

53. In negotiating sponsorship for their research, researchers should provide
honest and complete details of their competence and capacity to
undertake the work that is proposed. Researchers are encouraged to think
carefully about how they position themselves and their research design,
analysis and interpretation in relation to the interests of their sponsors
and other stakeholders. Any conflicts of interest or compromises to the
integrity of the research must be made clear and open to scrutiny.

54. Researchers should consider the implications of their research for the
global community and the environment more generally, bearing in mind
the interests of non-humans and broader issues to do with sustainability,
climate change and biodiversity. This includes such specifics as the
amount and type of travel, the nature of the food at meetings and
dissemination events, and more fundamental questions about the actual
research, for example, and the purposes for which it is undertaken.

55. Researchers should acknowledge sponsors of and participants in their

studies in any publications or dissemination activities.

Methods
56. These guidelines should not be interpreted as privileging particular
research methods over others: the Association respects the diverse
range of possible methods. Researchers who prefer or promote specific
methods, theories or philosophies of research should have knowledge
of alternative approaches sufficient to assure sponsors that they have
considered these, and that the needs of the research are being properly
addressed. Sponsors should be offered a full, honest and accessible
justification for the final choice of methods.

57. Researchers should, within the context and boundaries of their chosen
methods, theories and philosophies of research, communicate the extent
to which their data collection and analysis techniques, and the inferences
to be drawn from their findings, are robust and can be seen to meet
the criteria and markers of quality and integrity applied within different
research approaches.

26 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE COMMUNIT Y OF
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHERS

58. The ‘community of educational researchers’ is considered to mean all

those engaged in educational research – including, for example, students
following research-based programmes of study, independent researchers
and practitioners who undertake research, as well as staff who conduct
educational research in their employment within organisations such
as universities, schools, local and national government, charities
and commercial bodies. Established educational researchers, and
the community as a whole, have a responsibility to support the next
generation of educational researchers, including independent and
practitioner researchers. The Association is supportive of the Researcher
Development Concordat6 in this respect.

59. All educational researchers should aim to protect the integrity and
reputation of educational research by ensuring that they conduct their
research to the highest standards. Researchers should contribute to
the community spirit of critical analysis and constructive criticism that
generates improvement in practice and enhancement of knowledge.

60. Institutions, such as universities, that undertake educational research have

responsibilities in establishing and sustaining research collaborations with
other such institutions. The 2013 Montreal Statement on Research Integrity
in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations7 identifies 20 responsibilities
of individual and institutional partners in joint research. It begins from
the premise that such collaborations present special challenges for the
responsible conduct of research, because they may involve substantial
differences in regulatory and legal systems, organisational and funding
structures, research cultures and approaches to training. It maintains
that collaborating partners should take collective responsibility for the
trustworthiness of the overall collaborative research and individual

6 The Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers.

https://researcherdevelopmentconcordat.ac.uk
7 www.wcrif.org/downloads/main-website/montreal-statement/123-montreal-statement-
english/file

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 27

 responsibility for the trustworthiness of their own contributions. In any
inter-institutional research collaboration, it is important for individuals
and institutions to avoid a presumption that certain institutions, by virtue
of their history or other considerations, are necessarily more likely to
know what good research, including ethical research, entails.

61. Educational researchers should not criticise their peers in a defamatory or

unprofessional manner, in any medium.

62. It is recommended that researchers, in communications about research

projects, identify an appropriate contact whom participants or other
research stakeholders can contact if they wish to raise questions or
concerns, including those to do with making a complaint.

63. Where researchers, participants or other stakeholders become aware of

examples of malpractice or potential malpractice by a researcher, they are
advised to contact the appropriate individual, organisation or authority
and raise their concern, following an established complaints procedure.
If there is no established complaints procedure, the complainant should
respect the researcher’s right to respond and, with due consideration of the
important principle of the public’s right to know, they should avoid bringing
the researcher or broader community into disrepute through public
accusations or allegations. This is relevant, for example, in the case of
potential social media trolling as it relates to commenting on research. The
Association has developed its own social media guidelines for reference.8

64. In any instance in which a stakeholder or member of the public raises a

concern or makes a complaint, researchers have a duty to respond with
appropriate action.

65. Plagiarism is the unattributed use of text and/or other material. There are
now many guidelines about plagiarism. They generally stipulate that all
sources should be disclosed by an author, and if large amounts of other

8 BERA. (2023). BERA handbook: Social media policy – external. https://www.bera.ac.uk/wp-

content/uploads/2023/11/Social-media-policy-External-New-logo.pdf

28 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 people’s (or the author’s own) written or illustrative material are to be
used, acknowledgement must be made and, particularly in the case of
other people’s material, permission obtained. In clear cases of plagiarism,
the author should be contacted in writing, ideally enclosing documentary
evidence. If no response is received, the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) advice is initially to ‘contact author’s institution requesting your
concern is passed to the author’s superior and/or person responsible for
research governance’.9

66. Attribution should include explicitly recognising authors of any type of

content, in all cases in which an author (or creator) can be identified.
As well as text, this includes images, diagrams, presentations and
multimedia content. Researchers need to be aware that a great deal of
content is subject to copyright, and cannot be freely reused or modified
unless it is explicitly licensed as such – for example, by means of one
of the ‘Creative Commons’ (CC) licences.10 Authors retain copyright of
CC-licensed material (which may be published hard copy or digitally), but
have chosen to permit reuse, distribution and sometimes adaptation,
depending on the licence terms; any copies or modifications have to be
made available under the original licence terms and must link to that
licence. Researchers have the responsibility of checking the conditions
for reuse, and for attributing the author(s) in all cases. Researchers
are advised to regularly check the latest guidance from COPE as digital
technology develops.11

67. Subject to any limitations imposed by agreements to protect

confidentiality, researchers should endeavour to make their data and
methods amenable to reasonable external scrutiny. Ideally, researchers
will make shareable anonymised versions of data available for secondary
analysis. They should be fully aware (and make participants aware) when
funding bodies require this.

9 COPE Council. COPE Flowcharts and infographics – Plagiarism in a published article –

English. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.2
10 See https://creativecommons.org/licenses/
11 https://publicationethics.org

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 29

68. Assessment of the quality of the evidence supporting any inferences is
an especially important feature of any research, and should be open to
scrutiny. Where sponsors initiate a request for scrutiny, and disclosure
of aspects of the data may be injurious to participants or not previously
agreed by them, researchers should with sponsors consider appointing a
mutually acceptable third party to undertake such a scrutiny, who would
also be bound by any existing non-disclosure agreements.

69. All results of interventions and evaluations, including those that

are negative, should be reported. Evaluations should preferably be
registered beforehand with an official body that maintains a platform
for this purpose (indeed, many sponsors require this). A condition of
such registration is that researchers report the results of their research
– whatever they are – in full at the specified end-date of a project. This
should therefore allay any concerns that negative results will be withheld.

RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PUBLICATION AND DISSEMINATION

70. Educational researchers should communicate their findings, and the

practical significance of their research, in a clear, straightforward
fashion, and in language judged appropriate to the intended audience(s).
Researchers have a responsibility to make the results of their research
available for the benefit of educational professionals, policymakers and
the wider public, subject only to the provisos indicated in subsequent
paragraphs. They should not accept contractual terms that obstruct their
exercise of this responsibility.

71. Where research is conducted in a setting in which English is not the

prevalent (or only) language, researchers should make the fruits of their
research available in languages that make it locally accessible.

72. To assist researchers in making the results of their research accessible,

consideration should be given to providing open access, as is increasingly
required by sponsors and some other bodies. Mindful of the potential
impact of research findings outside of academia or specific educational

30 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 institutions and organisations, researchers should think carefully about
the implications of publishing in outlets that restrict public access to
their findings.

73. Researchers acting as consultants should be particularly aware of

potential constraints upon publishing findings from projects which
their institutions, sponsors, partners or publishers may consider to be
commercially sensitive, and whose findings may, in whole or in part,
need to remain confidential for that reason.

74. In some circumstances, research findings will be regarded as sensitive

information by sponsors, commissioners or other research stakeholders
(for example, because they raise politically or culturally controversial
issues, or because they may result in negative publicity for an
organisation). When researchers become aware that research findings
are likely to be sensitive, they should aim to inform stakeholders
prior to publication, and negotiate with those stakeholders a fair
publication strategy that takes into consideration the public interest
in the findings, the researchers’ need to publish and the stakeholders’
concerns. Particular care should be taken to guard against publication or
dissemination leading to discrimination against marginalised or otherwise
disadvantaged groups or particular individuals, including whistleblowers,
or to negative impressions being formed or reinforced about such groups
or individuals.

75. Researchers must not bring research into disrepute by in any way
falsifying, distorting, suppressing, selectively reporting or sensationalising
their research evidence or findings, either in publications based on that
material, or as part of efforts to disseminate or promote that work. When
non-trivial errors or other problems are identified in published work,
researchers should rectify these as best they can, typically in the form of
a published correction. In some cases, a retraction may be needed.

Authorship
76. The authorship of publications normally comprises a list of everyone
who has made a substantive and identifiable contribution to the

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 31

 research being reported. Examples of this include: contributing
generative ideas, conceptual schema or analytic categories; writing first
drafts or substantial portions of text; significant rewriting or editing;
contributing significantly to relevant literature reviewing; and contributing
substantially to data collection and analysis, and to judgments and
interpretations made in relation to it. Where research has involved
collaboration across different roles or professions – for example, between
education researchers who are academics and those who are teachers
or other practitioners – then anyone who has made a substantive
contribution should be credited as a co-author. Less substantive
contributions should be acknowledged.

77. Academic status or any other indicator of seniority does not determine
first authorship. Rather, the order of authorship should reflect relative
leadership and contributions made. Alternatively, co-authors may agree
to a simple alphabetic listing of their names. Consensual agreement on
authorship should be gained as early as possible in the writing process.
An increasing number of publishers now require author contribution
statements.

78. Researchers should not use research carried out with co-researchers as
the basis of individual outputs without the written agreement of the
co-researchers concerned.

79. Researchers and sponsors have the right to dissociate themselves

publicly from accounts of research in which they were involved, but
that are authored by others, where they consider the presentation
and/or content of those accounts to be misleading or unduly selective.
Arbitration may be useful in order to reach agreement before such
publication or dissemination.

Scope and format

80. For contracted and sponsored research, the contract will normally cover
methodologies, reporting processes, and publication and dissemination
strategies, including how the researcher’s name will appear and whether
the researcher may independently publish the findings. Research outcomes

32 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

 are unpredictable, and discussions to resolve any sensitive issues are both
to be expected and advisable prior to publication of findings.

81. The format(s) in which research is published, and the means by which
those publications are disseminated, should take into account the
needs and interests of the communities that were involved in the
research. Researchers have a responsibility to share their findings with
participants and their wider social groups as fully as possible, while
maintaining confidentiality.

RESPONSIBILITIES FOR RESEARCHERS’ WELLBEING

AND DEVELOPMENT

82. Safeguarding the physical and psychological wellbeing of researchers is

part of the ethical responsibility of employers and sponsors, as well as
of researchers themselves. In general, there should be an ethics of care
for researchers, including self-care. Safety can be a particular concern
in certain circumstances, for example when fieldwork is undertaken in
situations that are potentially risky. Researchers should be aware of the
legal responsibilities as well as the moral duty of institutions towards
the safety of staff and students. Institutions, sponsors and independent
researchers should consider whether an in-depth risk assessment and
ongoing monitoring of researcher safety is advisable, especially for
those undertaking fieldwork, working in certain jurisdictions and/or
investigating sensitive issues; this may be required by employers and
sponsors. Principal investigators, other researchers, students undertaking
research and their supervisors should ideally be offered training on
researcher safety. Specialist training should be made available to
researchers entering conflict or post-conflict settings, or areas with high
levels of infection or other risks.

83. Employers and sponsors need to avoid exploiting differences in the

conditions of work and roles of other researchers, including student
researchers and those on time-limited contracts. Employers are also
responsible for supporting researchers’ personal and professional career
development. The BERA Charter for Research Staff in Education provides

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 33

 guidance on these issues.12 Researchers employed in higher education
institutions in the UK are covered by the Concordat to Support the
Career Development of Researchers, which stipulates the standards
that research staff can expect from the institution, as well as their
responsibilities as researchers.13

12 BERA. (2013). The BERA Charter for Research Staff in Education. www.bera.ac.uk/publication/
the-bera-charter-for-research-staff-in-education
13 The Concordat. (2019). The Concordat to support the career development of researchers.
https://researcherdevelopmentconcordat.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Researcher-
Development-Concordat_Sept2019-1.pdf

If you have any feedback or queries about these ethical guidelines, please
contact [email protected].

While BERA cannot provide ethical guidance further to these guidelines,

or comment on individual cases, we value feedback, and will endeavour
to address any and all points and concerns in subsequent editions of
these guidelines.

34 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Historical note
The provenance of these guidelines can be traced back to a BERA invitational
seminar convened by John Elliott and held at Homerton College, Cambridge in
March 1988. The seminar led to a report published in Research Intelligence 31
(February 1989), which called for a code of practice to be drawn up. In 1991,
BERA Council invited Caroline Gipps and Helen Simons to formulate a set of
guidelines, drawing with permission from the Elliott report and the ethical
guidelines recently published by the American Educational Research Association.
In 1992 the draft BERA guidelines were published in Research Intelligence 43
(Summer 1992) for members’ comment, and later that year they were
formally adopted.

As a code of practice the guidelines were universally welcomed; however,

they also attracted a degree of criticism in relation to their scope and
application. An example of this was the critique presented by Peter Foster at
the 1996 BERA conference. Following Peter Foster’s death in 1999, his paper
was reproduced in Research Intelligence 67 (February 1999) as a tribute to his
work. Michael Bassey, the then academic secretary of BERA, used the paper to
promote debate within BERA Council and, at the beginning of her presidency
in September 2001, Anne Edwards announced her intention to update the
1992 guidelines.

In spring 2002, a working group comprising John Gardner (chair), Ann Lewis
and Richard Pring began the task of revising the guidelines. The revision
built on the 1992 statement to recognise the academic tensions that a
multidisciplinary community generates when dealing with the complex
research issues that characterise education contexts, and to include the field
of action research. Over the next 18 months several consultative exercises
were carried out, and in spring 2004 the final draft of the Revised Ethical
Guidelines for Educational Research14 was formally adopted by Council. These
guidelines stood unchanged until concerns began to be raised about aspects
of some contemporary research contracts running contrary to the Association’s

14 Archived at www.bera.ac.uk/researchers-resources/publications/revised-ethical-guidelines-
for-educational-research-2004

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 35

declared principles and ethical code – for example, those that prevent or
inhibit publication.

Therefore, in late 2008 Pamela Munn (president) set up a working group to

examine and make recommendations on these issues. The subsequent report,
from David Bridges (chair), Sean Hayes, Jeremy Hoad, Saville Kushner, Olwen
McNamara, Ian Menter and Nigel Norris, came to Council in November 2009.
This report refined and strengthened the Association’s position on the rights
of researchers in commissioned research contexts. It recommended a number
of further changes and updates, including the need for updated guidelines on
culturally sensitive issues. Council accepted the majority of the changes, and
asked another small group, comprising Uvanney Maylor, Pat Thompson and
David Bridges, to develop the final amendments on cultural sensitivity. The
new guidelines were then formally adopted by Council in June 2011.15

In 2015 BERA convened a group to review the 2011 ethical guidelines and
suggest what may need updating, particularly with regards to how the
guidelines accommodated and facilitated practitioner research, how they
integrated technological development, and any other pertinent issues arising
since the previous review. The group consisted of Anna Mountford-Zimdars,
Rachel Brooks, Alison Fox and David Lundie. This was followed by the
establishment of an Ethical Guidelines Review Working Group in 2016, chaired
by Sara Hennessy and including Ruth Boyask, Alison Fox, David Lundie, Marilyn
Leask and Lesley Saunders, assisted by Jodie Pennacchia. The working group
consulted BERA members and a wide range of experts, learned societies and
stakeholders,16 and reviewed key publications. Significant revisions were made
to the guidelines to incorporate new concerns such as those raised by online
and social media research. The consultation process led the review to consider
more explicitly the range of contexts for educational research, in particular:
research by organisations outside higher education; school-based and

15 Archived at https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-
research-2011
16 Among the experts who gave substantial responses to our consultation were representatives
from the National Education Union, teaching school alliances, Chartered College of Teaching,
Higher Education Funding Council for England, National Foundation for Educational Research,
Social Policy Association, Social Research Association, Centre for the Use of Research and
Evidence in Education, and the Education Achievement Service for South East Wales.

36 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

practitioner research; studies carried out in international contexts; and online
and social media-related research. A more deliberative and less prescriptive
approach was also taken to the language of the guidelines. This has been
maintained in the latest set of revisions.

After independent peer review, the updated draft was then passed to Pat Sikes
who worked with Gary McCulloch in preparing an updated version ultimately
approved by Council in June 2018.

At the time of publication, it was agreed that after three years, BERA Council
would undertake a new review and therefore a review group was established in
early 2022, tasked with reviewing the guidelines and making recommendations
for any changes to Council. Chaired by Alison Fox, that group consisted of
Nicole Brown, Sin Wang Chong, Matthew Courtney, Merris Griffiths, Felicity
Hasson, Kerry Heathcote, Iryna Kushnir, Pauline Lyseight-Jones, Una O’Connor
Bones and Aimee Quickfall.

As part of their considerations, the review group was asked to identify:

recent, relevant ethical guidance; aspects not covered in the current BERA
guidance; and general improvement to the structure and content. The group
met collectively and then established Padlet walls17 and subgroups on digital
research, international and intercultural aspects, and links to practitioners
and independent researchers. They also commissioned position papers
for their deliberations on: inclusivity for neurodiversity of researchers and
participants; inter-university collaborative research; sustainability and
environmental responsibility; sensitive issues and vulnerable groups; and
ethics of publication.

The outcomes were reported to BERA Council, which decided that this revision
would not entail a full-scale rewrite of the guidelines. However, there were
some areas clearly identified that warranted inclusion or strengthening. These
included: the need for direct reference to the importance of environmental
sustainability; an update of the section ‘Responsibilities for publication
and dissemination’ to take account of the ethical issues generated by
increased open access mandates, particularly around author naming order

17 Padlet is an online post-it wall. It allows individuals and groups to post their comments,
questions and resources in one place that is accessible to everyone.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 37

and inclusive access to publication; the inclusion of references to the ethics
of care for researchers, stressing that references to risk assessment and
ethics of care do not absolve behaviour; and recognition of assent as well as
consent for including children in research. Council also felt there should be
increased emphasis on points related to digital research and secondary data
collection regarding privacy and data storage, and stronger emphasis on both
intercultural and interdisciplinary research.

Given the general consensus on what needed to be changed, Council identified

the need for an experienced academic to take on the next stage of drafting
the revised guidelines as a collaborative process involving members of
BERA’s Leadership Committee. After a competitive process, Michael Reiss was
appointed to the role; he produced a draft for consideration by the Leadership
Committee alongside a commentary on the nature of, and reason for, the
changes recommended.

The final text was approved by Council in late 2023.

38 BRITISH EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Acknowledgements

In compiling this version of the guidelines, BERA would like to

acknowledge the contribution of the original review group led by Alison
Fox and comprising Nicole Brown, Sin Wang Chong, Matthew Courtney,
Merris Griffiths, Felicity Hasson, Kerry Heathcote, Iryna Kushnir, Pauline
Lyseight-Jones, Una O’Connor Bones and Aimee Quickfall.

We also acknowledge the role of Michael Reiss in producing a draft

version of the revised guidelines and members of BERA Council who
commented and advised as they were finalised.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, FIFTH EDITION 39

British Educational Research Association
www.bera.ac.uk | @BERANews