Ethics can be defined as “the science of morals or rules of behaviour” (British Psychological Society, 2009), and ethical guidelines describe what actions are morally right and wrong, and can assist and clarify the judgments of individual practitioners (Lindsay, Koene, Overeeide & Lang, 2008). A code of ethics is a set of moral principles used to govern the behaviour of professionals within an organisation. A code of ethics serves many purposes including establishing and maintaining the viability of a profession and enhancing public confidence in individuals who have bene trained to meet the profession’s ethical standards (Frankel, 1996). Likewise, they can act as a support to guide individual psychologists to resolve ethical challenges and be used to discourage the likelihood that psychologists will in engage in unethical conduct in their professional practice (Fisher & Younggren, 1997). Similarly, code of ethics can be used to gain public trust, by showing that psychologists are members of a trustworthy and substantial profession with a high level of standards (Frankel, 1996).
The British Psychological Society
Educational psychologists are required to behave ethically in all their professional activities, and when issues arise, such as seeking informed consent as part of an assessment process, they should be familiar with the process by which to make the most ethical decision possible (BPS, 2009). All practicing educational psychologists within the United Kingdom (UK) conform to the code of ethics as laid out by the British Psychological Society (BPS). The BPS is the representative organisation for psychologists and psychology, and has a responsibility for promoting excellence and ethical practice in the education, science and practical functions of the discipline. The Code of Ethics and Conduct outlines the key ethical principles governing professional practice, and is designed to protect the integrity of the profession and the rights and welfare of the public (BPS, 2009). Each principle is described in a statement of values and a set of professional standards. The four ethical principles are respect, competence, responsibility and integrity (BPS, 2009). A code of ethics especially relevant for educational psychologists is the Professional Practice Guidelines set out by the Division of Educational and Child Psychology (DECP), part of the BPS. The document is supplementary to the society’s code of ethics and conduct and provides guidelines on the relationship between the client and professional power issues, professional behaviour, professional practice and promoting good professional conduct and practice (DECP, 2002).
The Health and Care Professions Council
The statutory regulator for all practitioner psychologists in the UK, including educational psychologists is the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), and all educational psychologists are required by law to be registered with the council. The overarching purpose of the council is to protect the rights and welfare of the public. It does this by setting and maintaining standards of conduct for the professions it regulates and also publishes and maintains a register of all health and care professionals who meet the professional standards and requirements of practice (HCPC, 2016).
Similar to the BPS ethics code, the HCPC has its own code of ethics. This code sets out the expectation of behaviour for professional practice for all registrants. There is an overlap between the ethical principles and standards set out in the HCPC ‘Standards of conduct, performance and ethics’ and those set out in the BPS Ethics Code. For example, the ethical principle ‘Competence’, in the BPS ethics code is similar to the standard of ‘Work within the limits of your knowledge and skills’ in the HCPC framework, as they both state the importance of practicing within the areas you have the appropriate knowledge, skills and experience for. Likewise, the ethical principle ‘Respect’, in the BPS ethics code has a ‘Standard of informed consent’, which is comparable to the standard of ‘Promote and protect the interests of service users and carers’, as the two state the importance of obtaining consent from the client before carrying out professional psychological services.
Importance of Ethics in relation to the Role of the EP
A key activity in EP practice is the conducting of assessments, therefore adhering to these ethical codes is critical, as well as having an awareness of ethical issues that may arise when working with children and young people (Welsh Government, 2016). Assessment can be defined as a process of gathering and discussing information from a variety of sources in order to develop a greater understanding of a child’s or young person’s strengths and areas of need. The assessment process creates appropriate recommendations for teachers, parents and other professionals.
Ethical issues will be discussed in relation to obtaining informed consent and parental engagement, confidentiality, the use of appropriate assessment measures, cultural sensitivities to testing, and computersied assessments.
Informed Consent and Parental Involvement
Prior to initiating contact with a child or adolescent for assessment, an educational psychologist should obtain informed consent. Informed consent can be defined as a decision made by an individual that is informed, voluntary and rational (APA, 2017). An individual is considered informed when they have been given a considerable amount of information about the psychological service being offered, including the potential benefits, risks and consequences. A voluntary decision must be made in the absence of coercion from family members or other professionals, and an individual must be able to make a coherent decision, weighing up the possible risks and benefits in order to make an informed decision (Posada, 2004). In relation to assessments, for a client to give their informed consent they should be given information regarding the nature and purpose of the assessment, the type of tests and evaluation processes, how the information may be used and who may have access to the assessment results (BPS, 2009; DECP, 2016).
To adhere to the previously discussed codes of ethics, educational psychologists are required to obtain informed consent from a client before carrying out an assessment (BPS, 2009; HCPC, 2016). The consent of a client should be obtained by means appropriate to their age and competence level. When a child reaches the age of 16, the law assumes they are competent to give their own consent (Department of Health, 2001). However, children under the age of 16 are able to give valid consent if they have sufficient understanding and intellectual ability to comprehend what is involved. In practice, EPs should seek to obtain informed consent from the child’s parent, guardian, or those with legal responsibility, regardless of age, to encourage parental engagement in the assessment process. EPs should discuss the benefits of carrying out an assessment, together with any associated potential risks.
An ethical issue that could arise in the process of obtaining informed consent is where an educational psychologist fails to consider such things as the language, culture and intellectual development of a client (Henkelman & Everall, 2001). Failure to explore these considerations could result in the client misinterpreting the information they are given regarding the assessment process, and therefore the consent they give may not be truly informed (Barnett, Wise, Johnson-Greene & Bucky, 2007).
As previously referred to, best practice is to obtain informed consent from the parents and guardians, regardless of the age of the child. Parents have responsibility for their child’s well-being. It is assumed that they will act in the best interest of their child, therefore there would be no reason to question to consent given before carrying out the assessment (Hesson, Bakal & Dobson, 1993). An ethical issue that may arise is if the parent does not appear to be acting in the best interest of the child, or when there is conflict between parents, or between a parent and child regarding the most appropriate psychological activities to be carried out in the assessment process. The educational psychologist may be faced with uncertainty about how to proceed, and may feel it a requirement to liaise with school staff and other professional to discuss the most appropriate course of action (Henkelman & Everall, 2001).
Whilst educational psychologist recognise the importance of parental engagement in the assessment process, this can sometimes be a factor that creates an ethical dilemma (Bourke & Dharan, 2015). For example, issues may arise when a parent does not fully understand the assessment process, and at any point cause them feel distressed and confused.
Confidentiality
Confidentiality implies a relationship between two or more persons in which the information communicated between them is to be kept in confidence (Mitchell, Disque & Robertson, 2002). The purpose of confidentiality is to protect the client’s privacy by ensuring that information they disclose is not discussed with others without the informed consent of the client. However, it is important to inform the client of exceptions to confidentiality in exceptional circumstances, such as if an educational psychologist has concerns about the safety of the client, or the safety of another person who could be endangered by the client’s behaviour (BPS, 2009).
The issue of confidentiality can be complicated during the assessment process due to the nature of information that is required in order to understand the situational context of the child’s environment (Simeonsson & Rosenthal, 2001). Educational psychologists should provide parents with a clear explanation as to how the information they give will be utilised, as parents may not wish to share information they believe would not be helpful to their child in the process. Educational psychologists are required to respect the privacy and confidentiality rights of the child and their family. In written reports and verbal conversations between the educational psychologists and other professionals involved in the assessment process, only information that is considered appropriate for the purpose of the assessment should be given.
Use of Appropriate Measures During Assessment
A fundamental aspect of the assessment process is to select the most appropriate measure, and this should be influenced by reason for the assessment (DECP, 2016). An appropriate measure should be chosen, which takes into consideration the psychologist’s competence to administer the test; the client’s age, culture, and language; and the test’s reliability and validity (DECP, 2016). Educational psychologist should also ensure current versions of a test are used to take advantage of additional features that could be beneficial for the assessment for the client.
Educational psychologists may be faced with an ethical issue when a request is made to them to undertaken an assessment of a client, which does not support their professional judgement and theoretical understanding (Stoiber & Vanderwood, 2008). For example, they often experience pressure from the child’s school, or other professionals involved with the child, to carry out normative assessments, such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC), despite there being no clear purpose or justification for using this. This challenge may present a dilemma for the educational psychologist when they are required to explain the reasons for declining the request.
The issue of choosing appropriate measures applies to conducting assessments with children with special educational needs. Test are standardised in their administration, scoring and interpretation, however educational psychologists assessing children with disabilities may often be required to adapt these standardised procedures to fit the individual needs of the child (Simeonsson & Rosenthal, 2001). In addition, children with disabilities may respond inconsistently between testing sessions, for example a client may be restless and uncooperative in one session, and in the next session be relaxed and cooperative. This could create reliability problems, and the educational psychologist would need to take into consideration when writing the report. In a similar way, the validity of a test administered to a child with special educational should be considered (Posada, 2004). For example, most psychological tests that are norm referenced presume that the child being assessed is similar to those in the original sample. Educational psychologists need to be aware of the fact that children with disabilities are often not eligible to be included in the sample for the standardisation of many common psychological tests.
Concerns in Culturally Sensitive Testing
Educational psychologists are expected to use assessment methods that take into account the clients, language preference and cultural background. When carrying out an assessment with ethnic minorities, educational psychologists should use assessment instruments that are both valid and reliable for that particular population (Puente & Perez-Garcia, 2000). If these instruments are not readily available, the psychologist is expected to interpret test results with caution, and take in to consideration the possible bias of the results. Gopaul-McNicol and Brice-Baker (1998) comment on evidence, which suggests children from diverse cultural backgrounds interpret test items differently, have different expectations and knowledge, and often do not score as highly on standardsised tests when compared to children from mainstream cultures.
Ethical standards state that tests should be administered in the child’s preferred language (DECP, 2002). An EP may choose to use an existing translated assessment instruments to assess a client from an ethnic group (Padilla & Medina, 2001), or select a suitable assessment instrument that would be culturally valid in the clients preferred language, prior to translation (Fouad & Arredondo, 2007). Although adequately translated tests can greatly enhance the accuracy of test results, educational psychologists should not ignore the important influence of the client’s cultural experience on the assessment process (Bracken & Barona, 1991). The unique experiences of individuals from minority groups can often have an effect on their educational, language and emotional development. Psychologists should be aware of any client characteristics that could reduce the validity of the instrument for that client. When validity is under threat, the psychologists should take this into consideration when interpreting and reporting test data, and any issues should be included issue in their reports.
There is an ongoing debate regarding the validity and reliability of using standardised assessment instruments for ethnic minorities (Padilla & Medina, 2001). The majority of the standardised psychological assessments are normed on mainstream, white, middle-class populations or developed using Western approaches to assessment. Psychologists must consider the cultural and linguistic characteristics of their clients when selecting assessment instruments in order to ensure they carry out an ethical assessment.
Research suggests that using use culturally inappropriate assessments often places educational psychologists in ethically challenging situations (Bourke & Dharan, 2015). In an attempt to overcome this, they suggest that using a dialogic approach to data gathering would give a more reliable and complete picture of the client. The information could be used as a base for their recommendations in the final report, and support the data from the assessment.
Use of Spoken Language Interpreters in Assessments
The requirement for psychological services to clients with limited English language proficiency is increasing (Wright, 2014). If the English language skills of the client are limited, the communication between the client and educational psychologists can be assisted by working with a qualified language interpreter to translate information from one language to another. Having a language interpreter will be beneficial in the assessment process when the client prefers to speak, or is more fluent in a language other than the educational psychologist’s primary language (Searight & Searight, 2009).
Specific training for psychologists working with language interprets is important, and consideration must be taken with regard to the relationship dynamics between the client, interpreter and psychologist (Paone & Malott, 2008). Psychological services conducted with interpreters often changes the nature of the relationship, and it can be said that a client’s relationship may be compromised if the psychologist does not establish a relationship with the interpreter prior to providing services to the client (Tribe & Keefe, 2009). Issues may arise if the psychologist does not form a prior with interpreter, as the interpreter may misunderstand their role, and overstep their role (Tribe & Lane, 2009).
It is the responsibility of the educational psychologists to inform and clarify the expectations of ethical standards that the language interpreter should adhere to during the assessment process, such as confidentiality (Searight & Searight, 2009). An educational psychologist who relies on the skills of the language interpreter must take into consideration that they are giving the professional activity of the assessment to the interpret, and therefore must ensure that the interpreter carries out the activities that are within their professional competence. An ethical issue could arise if the educational psychologist inappropriately requests for the language interpreter to carry out psychological interpretations of the test findings, as there may be potential for mistranslation that would result in inaccurate results being concluded (Wright, 2014).
Computerised Assessments
There has been a recent growth in the use of computerised assessments to carry out psychological assessment (Garb, 2000). An advantage for using computers is that they are time and cost efficient, and computerised reports are accessible straight after the client completes the test, which saves time for the educational psychologists (Butcher, Nezami & Exner, 1998). Another advantage of using computers in psychological assessment is their accurateness in scoring the test data, as computers are less subject to human error (Butcher, Perry & Hahn, 2004). Similarly, some clients may prefer completing a computerised test, as appose to a paper and pencil test, as they may feel less anxious in responding to a computer monitor, than to the educational psychologist themselves (Rozensky, Honor, Rasinski, Tovian & Herz, 1986).
While there are many advantages of using computersied assessments, educational psychologists must have an awareness of some problems and ethical challenges associated with the use of them. Educational psychologists who choose to use computerised assessments should be cautious when using the computerised interpretation, to ensure that the interpretation accurately reflects the client being assessed within the computer-generated report. Educational psychologists should recognise that computer interpretations are general descriptions of profiles, based on group norms, and are not adjusted to take into account the client’s relevant history information (Butcher, 2003). A computerised report may include statements that are not applicable to a particular client, so educational psychologists need to review each statement within the computer-generated interpretations, and make a professional judgement as to which statements are valid for the client, and which should be discarded. Educational psychologists may be challenges if they unquestionably accept the computer-generated interpretations and for example, copy large sections of the computer-generated interpretation narratives into the client’s report. Ethical issues may be raised if an educational psychologist fails to check the accuracy of the computer-generated report for each individual client, and presents inaccurate interpretations in the clients report as if they were accurate (Groth‐Marnat & Horvath, 2006).
Another risk of computerised assessments is that educational psychologist may become dependent on the computer report, and have less involvement in interpreting the test data themselves. It is important they are aware that computersied reports cannot replace the important psychological observations, such as how the client presented for the test and responded to the test environment (Butcher, 2003), and recognise that these observations can play an essential part in the assessment process. Ultimately, the educational psychologist writing the report should use the computer-generated interpretations as a resource for their final report, rather than using it as the final product (Walker & Myrick, 1985). Also, they should acknowledge they have full responsibility for the content and wording of the final report, regardless of how the interpretations were generated (Bersoff, DeMatteo & Foster, 2012). Educational psychologists cannot excuse themselves of ethical and legal responsibility on the basis that a possibly inaccurate report is produced using a computerised assessment (Walker & Myrick, 1985)
Another problem with educational psycholgists using computerised assessments is associated with computerised administration, scoring and interpretation of the assessment if misused by unqualified professionals. Educational psychologists who are not suitably fully competent in administering, scoring, or interpreting computerised assessments, or who have limited computer skills, may be breeching the ethical principle of competence (Schulenberg & Yutrzenka, 2004; DECP, 2002). Computerised assessments, when used by those with little training or skill in test interpretation, can sometimes to do more harm than good to the client. And possibly even more worrying is the apparent sophistication of these reports, which make the interpretations seem valid to professional who are not trained for administer the particular test (Snyder, 2000).
A further issue with an increase in the use of computer technology in professional practice, is that an educational psychologist could unintentionally breach ethical standards relating to confidentiality, if access to computer test results were not protected (McMinn, Buchanan, Ellens, & Ryan, 1999). Storing confidential information on the computer hard drive or on the computer network may compromise confidentiality in particular circumstances when carrying out psychological assessments. This may be the case when the computer, being used for assessment purposes, requires service from a technician (Butcher, 2003). There are ways educational psychologists can reduce this risk, for example by using a password security system that would limit access to confidential information, and this would protect the educational psychologist, and school staff, from possible breaches of their professional ethical standards.
Conclusion
(Sentence before this to introduce my conclusion) It is important that educational psychologists conduct assessments with great consideration to a range of ethical issues that may impact on both the accuracy and effectiveness of the assessments, as well as protecting the rights and promoting the well-being of the individual Relevant issues include informed consent and parental involvement, confidentiality, use of appropriate assessment measures, concerns in culturally sensitive testing and the use of computerised psychological assessments. As educational psychologists attempt to achieve the highest standards of professional ethics in their practice, it is fundamental that they apply the necessary skills, knowledge, and values in each of the areas of assessment that have been discussed.