has committed a crime? Again, issues will be explored further in the chapters ahead.
Fairness, Equity, and Justice
Respect for the dignity of all persons also encompasses the ethical obligation to promote fairness and social justice. School psychologists “use their expertise to cultivate school climates that are safe, welcoming, and equitable to all persons regardless of actual or perceived characteristics, including race, ethnicity, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, immigration status, socioeconomic status, primary language, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, disability, or any other distinguishing characteristics” (NASP Guiding Principle I.3; also APA Principle E).
The school psychologist’s obligation to students from diverse cultural, linguistic, and experiential backgrounds goes beyond striving to be impartial and unprejudiced in the delivery of services. Practitioners have an ethical responsibility to actively pursue awareness and knowledge of how diversity factors may influence child development, behavior, and school learning (NASP Standard II.3.8; Flanagan et al., 2005) and to pursue the skills needed to promote the mental health and education of diverse students. Ignoring or minimizing the importance of characteristics such as ethnicity, disabilities, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic background may result in approaches that are ineffective and a disservice to children, parents, teachers, and other recipients of services (APA, 2017a).
Consistent with the broad ethical principle of justice, school psychologists also “strive to ensure that all children and youth have equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from school programs and that all students and families have access to and can benefit from school psychological services. They work to correct school practices that are unjustly discriminatory or that deny students or others their legal rights” (NASP Standard I.3.2; also APA Principle D).
Efforts by school psychologists to advance social justice in the nation’s schools and society align with NASP’s code Broad Theme I, Respecting the Dignity and Rights of All Persons, and Broad Theme IV, Responsibility to Schools, Families, Communities, the Profession, and Society. The construct social justice can be viewed as a contemporary articulation of the long-recognized ethical principle of justice. NASP leadership defined social justice as:
both a process and a goal that requires action. School psychologists work to ensure the protection of the educational rights, opportunities, and well-being of all children, especially those whose voices have been muted, identities obscured, or needs ignored. Social justice requires promoting non-discriminatory practices and the empowerment of families and communities. School psychologists enact social justice through culturally-responsive professional practice and advocacy to create schools, communities, and systems that ensure equity and fairness for all children and youth. (Adopted by the NASP Board of Directors, April 2017)
Responsible Caring (Professional Competence and Responsibility)
A shared theme in ethical codes of the helping professions is that of beneficence. Beneficence, or responsible caring, means that psychologists engage in actions that are likely to benefit others, or at least do no harm (CPA, 2017; Welfel, 2012; also APA Principle A). “To do this, school psychologists must practice within the boundaries of their competence, use scientific knowledge from psychology and education to help clients and others make informed choices, and accept responsibility for their work” (NASP Broad Theme II). Read and consider Case 1.2.
A Kia Motors assembly plant opened near the school district where David Kim is completing his school psychology internship. A number of Korean Kia employees and their families were relocated to the United States and now live in David’s school district. Some of the adults and children are quite fluent in English; others speak little English. The special education director asked David to conduct a school psychological evaluation of an 8-year-old girl, Seo-yeon, because she appeared to be struggling academically more than other Korean students at her school. Although Seo-yeon has acquired some conversational English proficiency, her parents speak little English. Consistent with codes of ethics, David, a second-generation Korean American, needed to carefully consider whether he was competent to conduct a valid bilingual assessment of Seo-yeon using Korean and English.
Competence
The NASP code of ethics requires that, “To benefit clients, school psychologists engage only in practices for which they are qualified and competent” (NASP Guiding Principle II.1; also APA Standard 2.01). As noted previously, the term competent generally suggests that the practitioner is able to integrate professional knowledge and skills with an understanding of the client and situation and make appropriate decisions, based on a consideration of both the immediate and long-term effects (Dreyfus, 1997; Nagy, 2012). Practitioners must consider their competence to provide various types of services and to use techniques that are new to them. They also must consider whether they are competent to provide services in light of client characteristics such as age; disability; ethnic, racial, and language background; and sexual orientation and gender identity. Psychologists who step beyond their competence place the student at risk for misdiagnosis, misclassification, miseducation, and possible psychological harm.
David (Case 1.2) consulted his university internship supervisor and his on-site supervisor about the special education director’s request. They discussed David’s self-assessment of his Korean language competence and his lack of prior supervised experience conducting a bilingual assessment. As a result, David met with the special educator director and offered to review Seo-yeon’s school records from Korea and conduct a screening of Seo-yeon to determine whether a full evaluation was needed. He respectfully explained why he was not qualified to conduct a comprehensive bilingual assessment of Seo-yeon if a disability is suspected. He also offered to attend school-parent meetings with Seo-yeon’s parents, noting that he would be able to help establish culturally sensitive “jeong” (rapport) with family members. In addition, David recommended that a trained interpreter attend the meetings with the parents because he was not proficient enough in Korean to explain the specialized terms used in meetings with parents of students who are struggling academically.
The students who attend our nation’s schools have become increasingly diverse in terms of race, ethnicity, language, national origin, and family composition (see Song et al., 2019). In addition, gay, lesbian, and transgender youth now “come out” at earlier ages than in previous generations, often during their middle or high school years (Jacob et al., 2010). Consequently, all practitioners must assess and periodically reassess their competence to provide services to a diverse clientele and seek the knowledge necessary to provide culturally sensitive services in the schools where they work.7 Where understanding of age, gender, race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, disability, language, or socioeconomic status is essential for providing effective services, school psychologists are expected to have or to obtain the training, experience, consultation, or supervision necessary to provide effective services. If a school practitioner is not competent to provide services to a particular client, then they are obligated to consider referring the client to a professional who is qualified to provide the needed services (APA Standard 2.01; also NASP Standard II.1.1).
Many different types of personal problems can potentially impact professional functioning, including mental or physical health problems, substance abuse, personal life stressors such as divorce, and professional burnout. When school psychologists experience personal problems, they may make poor professional decisions (Koocher & Keith-Spiegel, 2016). NASP’s ethics code obligates psychologists to “refrain from any work-related activity in which their personal problems may interfere with professional effectiveness” and to “seek consultation
