Discourses regarding ethical challenges in assessments - Insights through a novel approach

Abstract

<strong>Orientation:</strong> From a pragmatic approach, a novel method called ‘the town hall focus group’ was utilised to provide insight into discourse regarding ethical issues in psychological assessments. This article contributes to the understanding of the practice of ethics in assessments and suggests the use of this particular method to facilitate discourse regarding ethical issues.<p><strong>Research purpose:</strong> To illustrate a forum where ethical discourse can occur in a practical fashion in order to deal with the diversity of situations, questions, demands and responsibilities experienced by psychologists.</p><p><strong>Motivation for the study:</strong> Although codes and guidelines on assessment exist, many psychologists feel that despite the existence of ethical beacons, they are often faced with challenges for which no obvious solution is evident. A need exists for ethical discourse by which psychologists grapple with unique situations through an active dialectical process.</p><p><strong>Research design, approach and method:</strong> A qualitative research approach was employed using the town hall focus group. The study was conducted with a convenience sample of 108 psychologists and practitioners.</p><p><strong>Main findings:</strong> The town hall focus group method provided an opportunity and platform for ethical discourse regarding the ethical challenges experienced by psychologists.</p><p><strong>Practical/managerial implications:</strong> This article contributes to the understanding of the practice of ethics in assessments by illustrating a platform for ethical discourse regarding ethical issues experienced in assessments. The town hall method appears to be valuable as it provides a forum to discuss ethical challenges where members are allowed to share their experiences and thus gain access to peer support, insight and shared resources.</p><p><strong>Contribution/value-add:</strong> Although the focus group results are not transferable, this article proposes it as a useful method contributing to the understanding of the ethical issues and challenges experienced in assessments. The novel method applied and described facilitates peer discourse regarding ethical challenges. This method could be replicated and applied in other contexts as a means of contending with ethical challenges within a supportive environment.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article:</strong><br /> Levin, M.M., & Buckett, A. (2011). Discourses regarding ethical challenges in assessments - Insights through a novel approach. <em>SA Journal of Industrial Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde, 37</em>(1), Art. #949, 13 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v37i1.949</p&gt

Ethical challenges in assessment centres in South Africa

“…This study investigated ethical challenges in ACs in SA. The findings based on the results of the study revealed a number of ethical challenges and dilemmas, largely in line with research in this field (Caldwell et al, 2013;Levin & Buckett, 2011;Roodt et al, 2013). The results from this study are presented in the form of a conceptual framework to provide a lens through which these challenges could be viewed and understood.…”

“…Because the study was concerned with the concept of ethics which, by itself, cannot be fully understood or objectified (Levin & Buckett, 2011), it was essential to employ a research method that would allow for a thorough investigation and exploration of this phenomenon. A qualitative research method was preferred as it supported the goal of exploring and understanding a phenomenon within a particular context (Esterberg, 2002;Myers, 2013;Neuman, 2000).…”

“…It is against this background that this study was undertaken: If the ethical use of ACs in SA is not specifically regulated and if practice-informed guidelines are not compulsory and encompassing, would a better conceptual understanding of the ethical challenges pertaining to ACs not aid the creation of a framework within which the notion of ethics could be operationalised? Given also that ethics is a grey area (Pope & Vasquez, 1998) and there is often no clarity about what is right or wrong (Levin & Buckett, 2011), would new insights not bring about a greater awareness and unified understanding of the ethical challenges faced by AC practitioners in their day-to-day involvement with the AC method?…”

“…Another advantage of focus groups is that they are socially orientated in nature. This social element provides a sense of belonging to a group, which is likely to increase the participants' sense of safety and cohesiveness and therefore makes it easier for them to express their views in this perceived safe environment (Levin & Buckett, 2011;Peters, 1993). This also allows points of view to be challenged, extended, developed, undermined or qualified to enrich the researcher's data (Willig, 2001).…”