In the spring of 2019, we had the opportunity to team teach a doctoral course on Visual Ethnography. Most of the students came to the class because they were either intrigued by the concept of visual data, or the course just fit best with their schedules that semester. In short, we were working with graduate students who were a relatively blank slate when it came to visual research and visual methodologies. Inevitably, when the class discussion focused on ethics, the students were always confused and fuzzy about how to approach visual research in education. This bewilderment, in part, comes from how modern (but especially Western) societies use camera-enabled cell phones in daily life. For example, many of us can go to the park and quite simply capture the moment by taking a picture of our child on a playground slide. Unbeknownst to us, there could be other children in the shot, hiding in plain sight in the background. Given that a photo like this could be taken in any public space, and given that it contains young people who have not given us their consent to capture or share an image of their likeness, how do we answer the ever-pressing 21 century question: should we share this picture on social media? Would it be unethical? Since ethics have to do with highly subjective moral principles we employ to govern our behaviors and decisions, it may or may not be unethical; this all depends on how we define and apply ethics to our dilemma. If this same photo was used in a research project with children, (how) would that change our answer? To complicate matters even further, many visual researchers do not mention or address ethics in their work. Wang and Redwood-Jones (2001) were the first to discuss the ethics of visual research in the public health sphere in their seminal study. Public health research is also where visual methods like photovoice were originally created (Wang & Burris, 1997), but visual studies, and photovoice in particular, has recently spread into the educational research world. This can obscure matters further, as educational research often deals with minors and in spaces where adults and researchers can easily disempower participants. This is why we wanted to create a

中文翻译：

---

解开青年视觉研究的伦理和教学法并使之复杂化

2019 年春季，我们有机会团队教授视觉民族志博士课程。大多数学生来上课是因为他们对视觉数据的概念很感兴趣，或者课程最适合他们那个学期的日程安排。简而言之，我们与研究生一起工作，他们在视觉研究和视觉方法方面相对空白。不可避免地，当课堂讨论集中在道德上时，学生们总是对如何在教育中进行视觉研究感到困惑和模糊。这种困惑部分来自现代（尤其是西方）社会如何在日常生活中使用具有摄像功能的手机。例如，我们中的许多人可以去公园并通过在操场滑梯上拍摄我们孩子的照片来捕捉这一刻。在我们不知情的情况下，镜头中可能还有其他孩子，隐藏在背景中的显眼位置。鉴于这样的照片可以在任何公共场所拍摄，并且考虑到其中包含未同意我们拍摄或分享他们肖像的年轻人，我们如何回答 21 世纪的紧迫问题：我们应该在社交媒体上分享这张照片吗？会不会不道德？由于道德与我们用来管理我们的行为和决定的高度主观的道德原则有关，因此它可能不道德，也可能不道德；这一切都取决于我们如何定义道德并将道德应用于我们的困境。如果在一个有孩子的研究项目中使用同一张照片，（如何）会改变我们的答案？更复杂的是，许多视觉研究人员在他们的工作中没有提到或解决道德问题。Wang 和 Redwood-Jones (2001) 是第一个在其开创性研究中讨论公共卫生领域视觉研究伦理的人。公共卫生研究也是最初创建像 photovoice 这样的视觉方法的地方 (Wang & Burris, 1997)，但是视觉研究，特别是 photovoice，最近已经蔓延到教育研究领域。这可能会进一步掩盖问题，因为教育研究通常涉及未成年人以及成年人和研究人员可以轻松剥夺参与者权力的空间。这就是为什么我们想要创建一个 最近已扩展到教育研究领域。这可能会进一步掩盖问题，因为教育研究通常涉及未成年人以及成年人和研究人员可以轻松剥夺参与者权力的空间。这就是为什么我们想要创建一个 最近已扩展到教育研究领域。这可能会进一步掩盖问题，因为教育研究通常涉及未成年人以及成年人和研究人员可以轻松剥夺参与者权力的空间。这就是为什么我们想要创建一个