Week 6; Audiences and ethics

In relation to the audience, there are some issues which relate to the Block 1 readings; for example, reading 1 was based within a sociology context and this resulted in a number of ICT explanations, as this was not necessarily expected existing knowledge for the audience; the scope appeared to be determined by the funder, who was promoting VC use; the issue raised in the podcast relating to written word sometimes being a poor conduit of what has actually occurred within the reported situations was of relevance here - much of the transcipt would not have captured the richness of detail required to validate some points.
In relation to ethical issues on Reading 1, there was likely bias, as could be seen through the assumption of the 'enhancement' of programmes and the promotion of VC; the participants were not protected in terms of their names or the content of their personal discussions (or, at least, we are not made aware of this).
For the TMA research question I proposed, I appear to be aiming at a range of audiences; delivers of management courses, policy makers within an institution and decision makers within course programmes. The emphasis would be expected to be on the 'hard evidence' for the decision makers and policy makers, but practitioners would likely to be more interested in the 'what works' element and 'how do you do that?' This thinking mirrors some of the views heard on the podcast. If the research is aimed at this diverse group, it may be that it allows substantial freedom to focus on particular aspects; however, does this in turn suggest that the lack of depth would not really 'answer any questions' or provide adequate evidence on which to base strategic planning decisions?
Considering the ethical aspects of research in this field, it is not known if there is an ethical research policy within the institution; delivery of professional management courses at level 5 and above, as opposed to more academic course, such as HNDs, sits uncomfortably within the HE in FE framework, so it is not clear who should be the key point of contact for this.
However, generic issues of confidentiality and anonymity can be addressed by providing the assurance of these when first requesting participation and making a statement on how this will be achieved. An unintended consequence of the research could be that if one model of delivery is selected, whereas it is the flexibility and choice which could dictate future demand.