Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Language Testing
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Boyd, K.
Right arrow Articles by Davies, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Doctors’ orders for language testers: the origin and purpose of ethical codes

Kenneth Boyd

University of Edinburgh

Alan Davies

University of Edinburgh, a.davies{at}ed.ac.uk

Accountability in language testing, as in other professions, requires openness to stakeholders. Professions are increasingly publishing a Code of Ethics which sets out the principles governing the conduct of their members. The long tradition of medicine’s use of a Code of Ethics is discussed and the arguments in that profession with regard to openness is considered. The International Language Testing Association (ILTA) has recently agreed its own Code of Ethics (see Appendix 1). This article considers how far this Code of Ethics makes language testing an open profession and notes the dangers of face validity and of hypocrisy. The article then discusses the need for a Code of Practice to provide detailed guidance to language testers with regard to their professional responsibilities. It is concluded that:

• it is unlikely that an international organization could develop one universal Code of Practice, given the demands of enforceability and relativism; and

• that the way forward may be to encourage local Codes of Practice.

Caution is, however, necessary, given the possibility of tension between relativism and modernity, such that a local Code of Practice could become an alternative Code of Ethics.

Language Testing, Vol. 19, No. 3, 296-322 (2002)
DOI: 10.1191/0265532202lt231oa


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Second Language ResearchHome page
M. Thomas
Review article: Ethical issues in the study of second language acquisition: resources for researchers
Second Language Research, October 1, 2009; 25(4): 493 - 511.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Language TestingHome page
Guoxing Yu
Students' voices in the evaluation of their written summaries: Empowerment and democracy for test takers?
Language Testing, October 1, 2007; 24(4): 539 - 572.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Language TestingHome page
A. Davies
Three heresies of language testing research
Language Testing, October 1, 2003; 20(4): 355 - 368.
[Abstract] [PDF]