Ethical considerations

The research was carried out according to the ethical principles of research in human and social studies provided by the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK (2019). To conduct the research, the consent of the directors of both kindergartens was taken. The teachers and children’s parents gave their written consent for the participation in the research; and they were informed about the aim of the study and the methods used for collecting the data. The participation of the teachers was voluntary. Before conducting the interview or observation, the children were asked about their wish to participate. If a child did not want to be involved, he or she could avoid the procedure, but all the children agreed to participate in the research.

The research avoids mental or physical harm to the participants. During the interview, the teachers and the children were treated politely and respectfully.

The research was conducted according to the principles of confidentiality, privacy and data protection. The main concern of the current research was involving preschool children as the participants of the experiment. Children’s involvement could not have been excluded, as they were a focus group of the research and the target group of practical implementation of the research.

That is why I want to concentrate on the ethics of conducting the research with children.

a) Harm and benefits. Conducting observations and individual interviews did not suppose any potential harm to the young learners because they were observed in a familiar environment with their English teachers, whom they knew, which was important for the children’s emotional bal-ance (Powell et al., 2011:14). I, as an observer, visited the kindergartens before starting the experiment and participated in the English lessons and other routines and I also was familiar to the children. That is why they did not pay attention to me during the lessons I observed; and all of the learners agreed to be interviewed by me when they were asked. This fact that their English teacher did not take part in the interviews gave an opportunity to get more independent responses from the children (Mudaly & Goddard, 2009:270).

During the research, I minimized sources of distress for the children (Alderson

& Morrow, 2011:34), especially when the FLT Toolkit was integrated into the teaching process in the experimental group. For a while, the young learners were frustrated and disoriented, as they had to follow new rules in the kindergarten. This period lasted about a week and all the young participants needed strong emotional support from the teachers, parents or me. Using games and flexible rules in the organization of the FLLE allowed children to adapt to the environment faster. Sometimes several children refused to follow the rules in FLLE because they were scared of using English so often.

To calm and comfort them, the teachers and I provided de-stressing and relaxing activities for the particular children and had a talk with the children, so they could share their fears and concerns about the learning process.

The interviews with children were the most concerning part of the research. All the questions, tasks and the environment were adjusted to the learners’ needs and age capabilities in a way to ensure that no harm would be caused to the young participants (Solberg, 2012:332). The learners had emotional support and were interviewed in positive and comfortable conditions. During the interviews, nobody refused to participate in or asked to stop the procedure.

b) Informed concern. Before the research, consent was obtained from all the young participants (Powell et al., 2011:27). The children were fully in-formed about the goals of the research in a way they could understand and they were asked for permission to be involved in the research. The learners were informed that they could withdraw their consent at any moment they wished and could refuse to participate if they wanted.

Thompson and Rudolph (2000) point out that young children deserve to know what can remain confidential and what may need to be report-ed. This can be expressed as the difference between what can be “just between you and me” and what may need to be told to others “to stop someone from getting hurt” (Thompson & Randolph, 2000:35).

If a child did not want to take part in any activity, he or she could choose a different activity to participate in or have a rest or a talk with his or her teacher.

c) Privacy, confidentiality and payment. During the research, children’s right to privacy was respected (Solberg, 2012:335). The learners were ensured that nobody, except the researcher, could get their personal informa-tion. However, the administration of the kindergartens, parents and teachers permitted the use of photos taken during the English lessons.

The children did not refuse having their pictures taken.

All the observations and interviews were coded without using the real names of the children’s and nobody except me had access to the protocols.

If I needed to share information with the teachers, they were informed, but not in a detailed way and they did not know the personal information. If a parent or a teacher asked me about personal information collected during the research, they were not told and it was explained to them that they were not authorized to get the information. While observing the English lessons, just I and an English teacher were present in the classroom. However, the English teachers’ participation in the interview was unwanted because it could have impacted the children’s opinions (Alderson & Morrow, 2011:279).

During the interview the children agreed to be asked questions without the English teacher’s presence; that allowed avoiding the teacher’s influence on the learners’ responses. I state that the research participants did not receive any payment or pressure to participate in the experiment.