NiTRO + Creative Matters

Perspectives on creative arts in higher education

Ethics through practice-led lessons

By Associate Professor Sue Joseph — My first experience of a university ethics committee was as a candidate in the latter days of my doctorate, investigating voicelessness and the media. I was a new academic, teaching into the journalism school.

Industrial ethics in my journalism was front and centre throughout my career; research ethics within the Humanities, particularly and ironically in the field of journalism, was a relatively new notion at the time, and I had no concrete understanding of its depth or virtue. A committee member asked: “How can we be sure you have not scrabbled through your subjects’ garbage bins for information?”

Understandably, this question created a white hot rage, my research mapped against the worst type of stereotypical trope. How to answer?

Trying to calm, I simply asked him: “Have you any idea what and how we teach over there?” pointing to the building housing the journalism school.

The white hot rage took many hours to recede.

Thinking of this exchange, it’s a wonder how I ever got my job as an academic; I had no comprehension of these research processes or their rationale. The committee member’s question was profoundly out of order but I do remember he looked as quizzically at me as I looked stormily at him. Retrospectively, possibly the most chilling issue was that there was no discussion of minimising harm to myself, as witness of my trauma narrative research.

But when discussing what I later came to appreciate is the deep, deep merit of the ethics process within the Humanities’ tertiary sector, I use this story to describe the divergence between the academy and industry, and the understanding of ethical practice.

As practice-led lessons, I use field stories where I have made ethical decisions not to chase the headline, and challenge students and candidates to ponder what they would do in the same situation. An example: in London interviewing a Special Forces soldier who’d survived the Falklands War, I made a decision to withhold information from the final story and my editor. His story was about the last battle on Goose Green – it was dark, raining, and suddenly, he heard his dying friend, crying out for him; he hunkered down behind a rock, dropped his rifle and just sobbed. Then he collected a bullet in the mouth and was sent home. He shared the whole story. I never told anyone until I started using it anecdotally in my classes. Because when I spoke with this man, he was in clinical shock. And if his story was published, in terms of elite soldier unit status, it would have harmed him even more. It was not in the public interest – well, the only public interest is how warfare damages soldiers, the inhumanity of it, and a de-identified sociological study/survey of the military would be worthwhile. But not this story, not in a newspaper.

Some students agree with my actions; others deem them too safe; that I should have chased the big story, at all costs, even the human ones.

I always listen, then quietly talk about integrity – theirs, coupled with the integrity of the story. Their decision is their right choice – their individual moral compass – but I urge them, please, stop and think about harm minimisation, and only then make that choice. I need to believe some of them hear me.

The ethics process in the tertiary sector is a polarising one. It is time consuming and often iterative, but in journalism research out in the field, the process reminds researchers of the manifold layers of people’s lives; creative writers, of their relational responsibilities to their subjects, as well as themselves.

Early on in the appropriation of the science model of ethics imposed on the humanities, and possibly still today, many ethics committees believed that life writing does not require ethical approval. It does, possibly more so than any other. Often life writing is underpinned by trauma or what Dutro[1] writes the: “exposed wounds and the exposing of wounds”. It is a fraught and potentially dangerous space for candidate as well as supervisor, and the burgeoning of trauma narrative within the tertiary HDR sector is palpable.

I do believe now, 20 years after I locked heads with the ethics committee, there is movement towards a safer more ethical space around trauma narrative within doctoral spaces, but it has come from the bottom up; from those of us, relaying and managing fraught experiences. Institutions across the country have responded, slowly.

Several years ago with a colleague, we reached out to Australian HDR supervisors to ask if they felt trauma narrative was appropriately handled within tertiary institutions.[2] Interviewing 13 senior academic supervisors, all agreed more explicit guidelines are needed for this specific supervision. Most agreed that universities offer ethical and supervisory protocols but very little support for differing supervisory modes, claiming training is about operational aspects rather than relational. Most called for workshops addressing issues of trauma, and the ethics of trauma narrative.

The ethical tensions are still not adequately addressed in the academy, nor a prescribed training for supervisors. Commodifying trauma can only become an ethical offering when the sector dealing with these modes of creativity recognises both its ubiquity, coupled with ramifications.

[1] Dutro 2011, 194

[2] Joseph & Rickett 2017


Dutro, Elizabeth 2011, Writing Wounded: Trauma, Testimony, and Critical Witness in Literacy Classrooms, English Education, January, pp. 193-211

Joseph, Sue, & Rickett, Carolyn 2017, Supervisors’ perspectives on the ethical supervision of long form writing and managing trauma narrative within the Australian tertiary sector. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics, 14(2/3), pp. 61-71.

Sue Joseph (PhD) began working as an academic, teaching print journalism at the University of Technology Sydney in 1997. As Senior Lecturer, she taught in journalism and creative writing, particularly creative non-fiction writing. Now as Associate Professor, she holds an Adjunct position at Avondale University, is a Senior Research Fellow at the University of South Australia and is a doctoral supervisor at the University of Sydney and Central Queensland University. She is currently Joint Editor of Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics and Editor of TEXT Special Issues.

More from this issue


By EO Gill — As COVID-19 corrodes our creative industries, I find myself scrambling to identify anything that might signal

Read More +
What’s the point?

By Dr Julia Prendergast — Jared Diamond asked the acclaimed evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr (1904-2005) why Aristotle didn’t come up

Read More +

More from this issue

By Alejandra Canales and Susan Danta — It is truly an honour and privilege to collaborate with NiTRO to co-edit an edition on the topic of Collaboration and Authorship. The ideas for this topic grow out of a lecture series within the capstone subject in the Master of Arts: Screen at Australian Film Television and Radio School (AFTRS).
By Associate Professor Cathy Henkel and Isabel Turner — Diverse and equitable representation, both on and off screen, is the subject of considerable debate in the screen industry sector. Screen Australia’s Seeing Ourselves report (2016) was a milestone study in representation on screen and prompted the formation of Screen Australia’s Equity and Inclusion Strategy and multiple state and industry initiatives to foster a culture of inclusive story-telling.
By Dr Romaine Moreton — Indigenous media production at the cultural interface is the ancient application of what is already known, an accumulation of knowledges gained through throughout millennia for the purpose of producing and reproducing Indigenous values of balance, harmony, and sustainability.
By Associate Professor Beata Batorowicz and Dr Linda Clark — Women-artists often encounter a “double-bind” which involves an irreconcilable social demand of being “too much or not enough” within their personal lives and professional careers (Catalyst 2007; Williams 2018). The pressures of juggling family responsibilities and career are further exacerbated by making this undertaking appear effortless, with this overall set up leading to never being “good enough.”
By Dr Karen Pearlman — Film industries have poor records of treatment, opportunities, and recognition of women (see Loist & Verhoeven 2019). The Screen Australia media release on Gender Matters of 15/10/2020 states that “we aren’t seeing enough meaningful change in the sector”. It calls for “cultural change” to address the gender equity issues in the screen industries.
By Dr Kath Dooley, Associate Professor Marsha Berry, Margaret McHugh, Professor Craig Batty and Professor James Verdon — In recent years, cultural movements such as #metoo and #OscarsSoWhite have drawn attention to low levels of diversity on screen and behind the camera in the global screen industries.
By Pearl Tan — The push for diversity in many arenas is stronger than ever. In higher education, one way this can manifest, is in higher numbers of students from diverse backgrounds. With more diverse student cohorts, it’s certain that teachers will encounter students who are telling stories from cultures that we do not have lived experience of or are intimately familiar with.
By EO Gill — As COVID-19 corrodes our creative industries, I find myself scrambling to identify anything that might signal a brighter future. At the same time, I am wary of pandemic-born states of panic, since rapid-response initiatives often work to further disenfranchise already vulnerable members of the arts community.
By Dr Julia Prendergast — Jared Diamond asked the acclaimed evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr (1904-2005) why Aristotle didn’t come up with the theory of evolution. Mayr’s answer was “Frage stellen” which Diamond translates as “a way of asking questions [sic]” (Byrne 2013).
By Anna Tow and Deborah Turnbull Tillman — In a world where there is daily anxiety around the economy, our health and public engagement, we offer a pedagogy that promotes resilience, self-reliance and employability. As Collaborator, Deborah Turnbull Tillman is curator concerned with disrupting conventional process and situating her students as expert in their own practice rather than as subjects within hierarchical models of curating.
By Professor Stacy Holman Jones — Collaboration, authorship and preparing a new generation of storytellers who critically question and ethically engage with knowledge systems and representations is at the heart of a new minor in critical performance studies at Monash University.
By Rowan Woods and Dr Duncan McLean — Film school programs are only useful to students and industry if attention is paid to the winds of change surrounding screen authorship.