to, during and post-apartheid, psychological assessment featured as one of the most ... to past indiscriminate, unfair and biased use of tests. There is ... The paper illustrates .... 1980s, beginning with the repeal of discriminatory 'petty apartheid' laws, forced the HSRC to change ... These developments show that, although not ...
Psychological assessment in post-apartheid South Africa: Is there a future? Sumaya Laher* Kate Cockcroft Department of Psychology, School of Human and Community Development University of the Witwatersrand Private Bag 3, Wits, 2050 This is a final draft of the article. The published article can be found at: http://sap.sagepub.com/content/44/3/303.short Laher, S. & Cockcroft, K. (2014). Psychological assessment in post-apartheid South Africa: the way forward. South African Journal of Psychology, 44, 303-314 doi: 10.1177/0081246314533634
Abstract In 2014, South Africa is into its twentieth year since the 1994 elections which ushered in a democratic government and marked the official end of apartheid. The discipline of Psychology has in this time attained many milestones, several of which relate to the sub-discipline of psychological assessment. Prior to, during and post-apartheid, psychological assessment featured as one of the most contentious areas in the history of the country, as well as the history of Psychology. In this paper, we provide some critical insights into those aspects in the history of psychological assessment in South Africa that have led it to be the provocative field it is today. We also identify the positive contributions of psychological assessment that have facilitated South Africa’s movement towards a more just and equitable society. The paper concludes with suggestions for the future development of psychological assessment and how it can serve to enhance the discipline of Psychology and the wellbeing of South Africans.
Keywords Assessment; cognition; educational assessment; personality; psychological assessment; organizational assessment; testing 1
Psychological assessment provokes many strong opinions. It is highly controversial in South Africa due to past indiscriminate, unfair and biased use of tests. There is no doubt that, ‘testing in South Africa cannot be divorced from the country’s political, economic and social history’ (Claassen, 1997, p.297). This review and opinion paper intends to draw attention to the status of psychological assessment in postapartheid South Africa, to identify positive contributions and challenges to the development of the field, and to solicit interest and debate. In order to understand the current status of psychological assessment in post-apartheid South Africa, as well as offer some predictions for its future, it is necessary to understand its origins. Drawing on material available, we briefly discuss the most important developments in the history of psychological assessment in South Africa. We believe that the value of psychological assessment in contributing to a well-functioning South African society has been underestimated, and the paper identifies the most significant of its positive influences. Currently, a new identity is burgeoning for psychological assessment in South Africa, borne out of a long and troubled history. The paper illustrates how emerging research, legal challenges, a richly diverse populace and new technology have combined to create a uniquely South African field that will continue to contribute meaningfully to the wellbeing of the population.
Psychological Assessment in South Africa: The early years (1915 – 1952) Prior to the advent of apartheid, psychological assessment featured prominently in the psychological events in the country. Its history can be traced back as early as 1915, with the works of Martin (1915), Leipoldt (1916), Loades and Rich (1917), Dunston (1923), Macrone (1928), and Fick (1929) amongst others. This group of researchers worked primarily in the area of intellectual assessment, but consistently used tests developed on, and normed for, white children with black children. The lower scores obtained by black children were used as ‘evidence’ for the inferiority of the native intellect. This marked the start of an era of inequity for psychological assessment in South Africa. Even before apartheid was formally constituted, wittingly or unwittingly, these psychologists provided pseudo-scientific legitimization for the segregation of races in South Africa, which continued through the 1920s and 1930s (Abrahams, 2001; Seedat & Mackenzie, 2008). During this time, the focus of psychological assessment was on its educational applications. The Carnegie report on the Poor White Problem in 1932, Malherbe’s recommendation for vocational education and assessment at schools, Grosskopf’s promotion of psychological procedures when working with unskilled white workers of rural origin and the selection, 2
screening and counselling of military personnel in the late 1930s and early 1940s saw the expansion of psychological assessment to the organizational field. Seedat and Mackenzie (2008) suggest that these expansions were attempts to legitimize the discipline of Psychology as a useful field within South Africa, but they served an egregious end (whether intentionally or unintentionally), in laying the foundations and justification for separate development based on race. The work in the field of intellectual assessment had a direct impact on the development and justification of ‘Bantu Education’ in South Africa.
In the 1940s, the National Institute of Personnel Research (NIPR) was formed within the Centre for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). Lead by Simon Biesheuval, the NIPR is recognized for its pioneering work in the area of organizational assessment. A substantial body of work at the NIPR focused on the African worker’s aptitude for industrial work. Simon Biesheuvel in particular is acknowledged for introducing the idea of adaptability testing to South Africa with the development of the General Adaptability Test Battery (GATB; Foxcroft & Roodt, 2013). The GATB was innovative in developing procedures such as the silent-film technique that used mime to convey test instructions (Berry, Poortinga, Segall & Dasen, 2002). These were attempts at fairer and more equitable means of testing for ‘high workcapacity natives’ and ‘boss boys’, amongst others (Seedat & Mackenzie, 2008, p.81). Whilst the development of new assessment techniques and the adaptation of international tests, such as the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scales were praiseworthy achievements for the NIPR, there remained an underlying racist agenda, as evidenced in Biesheuvel’s writing about the African worker: On the other hand, he (the African) makes up for his lack of speed by his liking of repetitive action, on which he imposes a rhythm of his own. Africans may, therefore, prove far more tolerant to the monotony of machine operative work than Europeans. By transforming such works into mildly satisfying experiences, they may retain efficiency where the European becomes restless and frustrated (Biesheuvel, 1952, cited in Seedat & Mackenzie, 2008, p. 81). Yet, in 1943, Biesheuvel had published a book entitled, African Intelligence, in which he concluded, ‘…under present circumstances, and by means of the usual techniques, the difference between the intellectual capacity of Africans and Europeans cannot be scientifically determined’ (Biesheuvel, 1943). These inconsistent statements are seen in the research of many individuals and continued through the apartheid years. They suggest some equivocal feelings about the role of assessment in supporting separate development. At the time of these developments in the field of psychological assessment, the broader discipline of Psychology was formalized, with the formation of the South African Psychological 3
Association (SAPA) in 1948 and the subsequent recognition of the term ‘clinical psychologist’ by the South African Medical and Dental Council (SAMDC), now the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA).
Psychological assessment: The apartheid years (1952 – 1994) It is evident from this narrative that psychological assessment played an instrumental role in support of separate development and continued to do so in the 1960s and 70s. During these years, the repertoire of developed and adapted tests expanded. Tests were consistently normed on white standardization samples and used, without apology, with black individuals. A body of research on the ‘African personality’ also gained momentum. Biesheuval was instrumental in this work, delineating three broad objectives for psychological research, namely ‘achieving an understanding of African peoples’ behavior; providing a means of testing the general validity of human behavior hypotheses; and determining the extent to which African individuals’ behavior is modifiable (Bohmke & Tlali, 2008, p.144).’ Bohmke and Tlali (2008) argue that this group of psychologists felt it necessary to ‘understand’ the African personality in order to justify the inferiority of Africans to other races, and to control and modify African behavior. This agenda conformed to the Behaviourist tradition that dominated international Psychology at the time. An example of the work conducted at this time is that of De Ridder (1961, cited in Foster, 2008) who conducted a six year study of approximately 2500 African individuals who completed the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) (a projective technique of questionable cross-cultural applicability) as part of a job selection battery. Some of De Ridder’s main findings were that, the urban African is a personality with strong latent aggression and insufficient moderation and control; the religious super-ego of the urban African is still very tribally based; urbanisation and its effects have tended to increase the African’s feeling of being discriminated against (De Ridder, 1961, cited in Foster, 2008, p. 108).
It is clear from the example above that assessment was used predominantly to support the government’s racist agenda. The 1960s and 70s are famed for the arrests of Nelson Mandela and the Rivonia trialists, the Sharpeville massacre and a culmination of events leading to the 1976 riots and uprising. These events lead to both an international and local conscientisation as the prejudiced and oppressive system of apartheid was exposed. For the discipline of Psychology and psychological assessment, these years 4
marked a moment of truth. Some chose to remain loyal to apartheid policies, supporting the exclusion of black membership to SAPA. These individuals resigned from SAPA in 1962 when black psychologists were permitted to join the organization, and formed the Psychological Institute of the Republic of South Africa (PIRSA). Cooper, Nicholas, Seedat and Staatman (1990) suggest that the decision to allow black membership to SAPA was less altruistic than it appeared, and was based on its need to avoid international censure.
International censure and sanctions had a direct impact on psychological assessment in that international tests were no longer available on the South African market and thus could not be adapted for the local context. This ushered in an era of emic testing between 1960 and 1984, with the development of local tests, such as the South African Personality Questionnaire, the High Level and Intermediate Batteries, and the Mechanical Insight Test. However the majority of these tests were still primarily developed for, and normed on, the white population. Where tests were constructed for other ethnic groups, they were constructed for particular groups only, since different race groups did not compete for the same jobs under the apartheid job reservation policy (Abrahams, 2001).
A significant development in 1974 was the promulgation of the Health Professions Act, which recognized the discipline of Psychology as a profession. The Professional Board for Psychology was also established in order to regulate minimum training requirements and standards for registration as a psychologist, as defined by the Act (Seedat & Mackenzie, 2008). Later in the 1970s and early 1980s, researchers at the NIPR conducted pioneering work in the field of computerized testing, which was internationally a very novel area of assessment. Using a Varian minicomputer, a computer-based system was developed to administer tests of intellectual ability. Following this, the NIPR adapted the Plato computer-based testing system supplied by an international company, Control Data. However, when political and economic sanctions were introduced, Control Data withdrew from South Africa, it became difficult to maintain the system and it fell into disuse. Computer-based testing was later re-introduced at the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) in the mid-1980s, with the development of the PsiTest and Siegmund systems, as well as research on the Austrian-based Vienna Testing System (Tredoux, 2013).
5
In the 1970s and 1980s, the NIPR continued its focus on developing measures for industry, while the Institute for Psychological and Edumetric Research (IPER) developed measures for education and clinical practice (Foxcroft & Davies, 2008). In 1984, the NIPR and the IPER were incorporated into HSRC, the latter which became the dominant organization in psychological and educational test development in South Africa until the late 1990’s. Abrahams (2001) argues that the changing sociopolitical climate of the 1980s, beginning with the repeal of discriminatory ‘petty apartheid’ laws, forced the HSRC to change previous assessment and testing practices. As attention was increasingly drawn to issues of bias, equivalence and fairness, so researchers at the HSRC became aware of the imperative to develop tests that would be applicable to all South Africans. Verster (1987) and Taylor (1987) were instrumental in highlighting these issues, whilst Taylor and Radford (1986) and Owen (1989) conducted the first studies on test bias (cited in Abrahams, 2001). In response to criticism that the HSRC was not conducting sufficient cross-cultural research, the Senior South African Scales-Revised (SSAIS-R), which became the most commonly used intelligence test for school-going children, included the innovation of a separate norm table for ‘environmentally disadvantaged’ children. However, this test was only standardized for English- and Afrikaans speaking white, coloured and Indian South African children.
During the late 1980s and early 1990s, local measures were developed, such as the General Scholastic Aptitude Test and the Ability, Processing of Information, and Learning Battery (APIL-B) that could be applied to more than one cultural group (Foxcroft & Davies, 2008). The APIL-B was innovative in being the first learning potential battery developed for use with South Africans (Taylor, 2013). This was again in keeping with international trends in assessment, where the concepts of learning potential and dynamic assessment were being incorporated into test administration. These concepts originated with Vygotsky (1978), who viewed intelligence as socially mediated. He acknowledged that different individuals displayed different abilities or potential to learn, which he operationalized in his concept of the ‘zone of proximal development’ (ZPD). The ZPD reflects the extent to which an individual can develop or improve performance in a cognitive task, when provided with mediation or assistance by a more knowledgeable other. Learning potential reflects the difference between performance before and after mediation. The APIL employed and extended the ideas of Vygotsky and Feuerstein (who had extended Vygotsky’s work – see Feuerstein, Rand and Hoffman, 1979) in measuring both traditional, static, as well as fluid, dynamic cognitive ability and potential for learning. Local researchers saw the value of dynamic and learning potential assessment for addressing some of the difficulties in developing and using psychological tests with South Africa’s diverse population. These developments show that, although not 6
without its critics, the HSRC was one of the most productive agencies for change in psychological assessment in South Africa and provided the groundwork for where the field stands today.
The final development that influenced psychological assessment during the apartheid years was the formation of two associations which challenged the hegemony of the Psychological Association of South Africa (PASA), the latter which had been formed in 1983 by the merging of SAPA and PIRSA (Seedat & Mackenzie, 2008). These associations were the Psychology and Apartheid Committee and the Organization for Appropriate Social Services in South Africa (OASSSA), formed in 1989. In 1991, PASA and the two associations united to form the Psychological Society of South Africa (PsySSA) as it is still known today. This provided a unified organization for the promotion of the discipline of Psychology, and included a division on psychometrics.
Psychological assessment post-apartheid (1994 – 2014) The 1980s and early 90s marked a very active period of research and development of tests and testing procedures in South Africa. This was followed by much political tension in this sub-discipline between 1994 and 1998. As a result of the prominent role that psychological assessment had played in legitimizing apartheid, it had developed an extremely negative reputation locally. The trade unions were vehemently opposed to testing (Nzimande, 1995). Early drafts of the Employment Equity Act banned psychometric testing for employment purposes (Tredoux, 2013). A number of psychologists working in industry and academia, together with the HPCSA’s Professional Board for Psychology and PsySSA, lobbied successfully for this to be changed. The revised, and currently used, Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (Section 8) now states that psychological testing and assessment of an employee is prohibited unless the test or assessment is reliable, valid, unbiased and can be applied fairly to all employees.
During this time, the HSRC was restructured and the unit devoted to testing and assessment was repositioned. HSRC-developed tests, as well as international tests, such as the 16PF, for which the HSRC held copyright in South Africa, were sold to private organizations, such as Jopie van Rooyen and Partners, Psytech and Mindmuzik. These organizations assumed responsibility for the test distribution, 7
adaptation and development role previously undertaken by the HSRC (Laher & Cockcroft, 2013a). During these transition years, research in the field of psychological assessment in South Africa declined, but did not halt altogether. The HSRC commissioned a needs analysis on test use patterns and needs of psychological assessment practitioners. The findings indicated that psychological testing was being perceived more positively and that the most commonly used tests were those that evaluated intellectual ability, personality and interests. There was a mixed response regarding the need for a central test agency. Concerns included the use of outdated, culturally and linguistically inappropriate tests; the need for tests in all 11 official languages; the ability of the Professional Board to control and regulate test use; uncertainty about the definition of what constitutes a psychological test; that best practices regarding computerized testing needed to be promoted and that ethical issues in assessment should be foregrounded. As a consequence of this investigation, an agenda was generated to address these concerns and to guide the continued development of psychological assessment in South Africa (Foxcroft, Paterson, le Roux & Herbst, 2004).
This period also saw the development of the Differential Aptitude Tests and the adaptation and standardization of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales, Third Edition (WAIS-III) by the HSRC (before it was restructured) for all South African race groups. The Learning Potential Computerised Adaptive Test (LPCAT), a computer-based test of learning potential, was developed and demonstrated that South Africa was in touch with international trends in assessment. The LPCAT, which is still in use today, is based on the premise that individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds tend to underperform on traditional cognitive tests, and that nonverbal, figural items are less biased than verbal items. It is congruent with the Employment Equity Act (No. 55 of 1998) as it makes allowance for differences in educational background, access to opportunities and resources, is standardized for South Africans and has instructions in all 11 official South African languages (De Beer, 2013; Foxcroft & Davies, 2008). These advancements marked a change in values in the field of psychological assessment, as attempts were made to develop tests that were appropriate for, and unbiased towards, the diverse South African population.
This period also saw a change in the classification of psychological tests in South Africa. The Professional Board for Psychology had given the Test Commission of the Republic of South Africa (TCRSA) the mandate to classify tests and examine certain categories of practitioners. In 1996, the TCRSA was dissolved and the Psychometrics Committee was formed as a subcommittee of the 8
Professional Board. The Psychometrics Committee, in consultation with other stakeholders, replaced the ABC categorization of tests to a simpler, two-tiered system, where a test is classified as either a psychological test or not, based on whether it was used for the performance of a psychological act or not (Foxcroft, Roodt & Abrahams, 2013). Tests classified as psychological tests by the Psychometrics Committee may only be administered by qualified persons, such as psychometrists and psychologists, with the exception of projective and specialist neuropsychological tests, which cannot be administered by psychometrists and registered counsellors in their individual capacity. A recent document released by the Professional Board (Form 258, 2013) provides further restrictions on the range of tests that registered counsellors may use. Between 2000 and 2006, the Bachelor of Psychology (BPsych) degree and the category of registered counsellor (which exists alongside psychometrist and psychologist) were introduced. Given the many, rapid and (often) necessary transformations in the field, research in the area of psychological assessment was pervaded with challenges and became sluggish.
From 2004 onwards, local research in psychological assessment appeared to gain some momentum. Several high quality and useful textbooks were published (e.g. Foxcroft & Roodt, 2013; Kaliski, 2006; Laher & Cockcroft, 2013b; Moerdyk, 2009), and local research on assessment started featuring more prominently in South African and international conferences and journals. The removal of sanctions and the transition to a democratic South Africa once again opened up the market for international tests. Private test companies commenced with research on the psychological instruments for which they hold copyright. Unfortunately, much of this work has occurred in isolated pockets across South Africa. The recent book by Laher and Cockcroft (2013) offers one attempt at unifying the existing work into a single research compendium. Twenty years into democracy, there are signs of the development of a vibrant field. Psychologists specializing in assessment are actively contributing towards equity and redress by considering how to accommodate diversity in terms of language, educational background and socioeconomic status when developing and administering psychological tests.
Psychological assessment in South Africa: Contributions to a just and equal society Despite the positive developments mentioned above, psychological assessment is still viewed with some suspicion in South Africa, although this view seems to be diminishing. Considerable research has been conducted over the last 15 years to establish reliable, valid and fair psychological tests and this has contributed to gradually changing the national perception to one that increasingly sees psychological 9
assessment as an acceptable and valuable practice. The establishment of appropriate psychological tests for the South African population is complex and challenging. Post-apartheid South Africa is not without divisions and the social rift that has developed over the last twenty years is no longer based on race, but on income and social class. Many psychological tests contribute to this divide as they tend to cater for the Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Developed (or WEIRD) sectors of the population (Laher & Cockcroft, 2013a). It is clear that this excludes the majority of South Africa’s population. In the last 15 to 20 years there have been attempts to develop more suitable methods of assessment that do not handicap the disadvantaged and disenfranchised sectors of the South African population. These include attempts to provide appropriate norms for different sectors of society, such as for the Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Adults, Third Edition (WAIS-III) (Shuttleworth-Edwards, Gaylard & Radloff, 2013; Shuttleworth-Edwards, van der Merwe, van Tonder & Radloff, 2013). Given the educational inequalities still pervasive in South African society, these researchers highlight quality of education as a central variable along which normative samples should be stratified and which should be considered when conducting and interpreting IQ assessments. In addition, work is in progress on the adaptation of the 16PF5, and the adaptation and standardization of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV), as further contributions to more appropriate, equitable and fairer assessment practices.
Against the background of increased demand for non-discriminatory assessment procedures, both locally and internationally, dynamic assessment has been highlighted as an assessment methodology that views intelligence as changeable and grants the testee the opportunity to demonstrate how effectively s/he can take up instruction. The dynamic assessment approach introduced to South Africa in the 1980’s is increasingly being seen as one of the best ways to establish equity in testing. Given the unequal educational and employment conditions available to many South African, tests based on a dynamic approach represent a much fairer approach to making educational and occupational decisions about individuals. These represent a movement away from traditional, static approaches to cognitive functioning, the latter which tend to reflect only Western, Eurocentric, middle-class values and attitudes (Laher & Cockcroft, 2013a). In this context, there are also suggestions that tests which focus on fluid cognitive abilities (novel problem solving), such as working memory assessments, represent more culture fair means of tapping cognitive ability than traditional measures of crystallised knowledge (Cockcroft, Alloway, Copello & Milligan, under review).
10
In addition to dynamic assessment, researchers have indicated the value of using qualitative approaches in assessment. This has been most evident in the area of vocational counselling and assessment where the constructionist and life design approaches have led to the development of instruments, such the My System of Career Influences (MSCI) and the Career Interest Profile (CIP), which focus on life narratives and contextual factors in vocational assessment, rather than relying solely on traditional testing (see Maree, 2011; Watson & McMahon, 2013). Similarly, Theron (2013) indicates how the Junior South African Individual Scales (JSAIS) can be used to provide valuable qualitative indicators in the context of school readiness assessment and emphasizes that, in the South African context, these indicators may be more useful than interpretation based on IQ scores alone. Amod (2013) advocates the use of the Initial Assessment Consultation (IAC) approach, a shared problem-solving approach to child assessment, focusing on collaboration with parents, caregivers and significant others, such as teachers, with the aim of facilitating learning and empowering clients and their families and argues that this is a more valid approach in the South African context. These approaches represent a move to cross-validate psychometric data, with rich, qualitative testee information.
While there has been growth in research in the field in the last 15 years, there has been very little local test development since the restructuring of the HSRC and the opening up of international test markets. Psychological assessment contributes to the development of a fair and just society by ensuring that tests are adapted and standardized appropriately for local contexts, but it has yet to make a contribution by developing suitable emic tests. Such tests would be most useful for the sectors of the population for whom Western methods of testing may not apply. Work on the Basic Traits Inventory represents a step in this direction. The locally developed inventory assesses the five factors of personality as represented in the Five Factor Model of personality (Taylor & de Bruin, 2013). The South African Personality Inventory (SAPI) project has made the largest contribution in this regard. Starting from the bottom up, the SAPI was constructed using personality descriptions from a representative sample of all South African cultural and linguistic groups. These qualitative descriptions were analyzed to produce items for the SAPI. Presently, the SAPI is being piloted on representative South African samples (see Hill et al., 2013). These studies are laudable, and there is a pressing need for more projects of the emic type in the other areas of functioning, in order to move the discipline forward. This would fit well with the burgeoning of an indigenous South African Psychology (Sher & Long, 2012). Gradually, there has been recognition that unquestioning acceptance of, and subscription to, Western, Eurocentric theoretical models and paradigms is not suitable for South Africa. South Africa, with its diverse population, provides a unique context for 11
the development of indigenous knowledge and this needs to be extended to the field of psychological assessment. Exchange of ideas around this topic must be invited if South African research in this field is to develop to maturity.
Psychological assessment in South Africa: Is there a future? It is the opinion of the authors that the answer to this question is an unequivocal ‘yes’. It is evident from the discussion thus far that psychological assessment in South Africa has come a long way since 1915. It has made an effort to shrug off its negative mantle and is grappling with attempts to form a new, positive identity that can contribute meaningfully to South African society. Gradually, the field is being more actively promoted in academic programmes. It is hoped that it will be more rigorously taught in University curricula, and that more psychologists will be encouraged to conduct psychological assessments in practice. In terms of research, there is still much that can be done to develop the field of psychological assessment in South Africa. This means continuing the investigation of the more traditional factors that impact on psychological assessment, such as language proficiency, quality of education, response biases and practical constraints within the assessment context (see Laher & Cockcroft, 2013c for further discussion of these issues), as well as examining other factors, such as socio-economic status, which also impact on test performance.
There are a number of challenges that face the field of psychological assessment and which should be addressed if it is to progress and make a significant contribution to the discipline and the country. Since the promulgation of the Employment Equity Act (1998), which prohibits the use of psychological tests unless they have been proven to be reliable, valid and unbiased, there has been minimal policing of its implementation. This means that the unscrupulous use of tests on the public goes unchecked. The misuse of psychological tests raises the broader topic of ethics. An examination of research reveals very little in the area of the ethics of psychological assessment, other than that written by Foxcroft (1997; 2011) and Coetzee (2013). Coetzee (2013, p. 410) identifies key ethical considerations for research and practice in psychological assessment and argues for the development of an ‘ethical consciousness’. Personal communication with colleagues in the field indicates that this is a crucial gap in both research and practice. It is therefore important for issues related to the ethics of psychological assessment to form a core part of University curricula and that this be continued after training in the continuing professional 12
development (CPD) requirements. Of the compulsorily five CPD points needed on ethics, some should be devoted to the ethics of psychological assessment.
Another impediment to the development of the field of psychological assessment is that, despite its skilled and specialized nature, it does not yet receive the same recognition as other fields in Psychology. Very few psychometric programmes exist in the country and this means that there is a shortage of skilled personnel to assist with test development and assessment research. The Professional Board for Psychology at the HPCSA does not appear to have the resources to undertake leadership in this regard. Ideally, a unit with the sole mandate of test development and adaptation, as existed in the past HSRC structure, should be established to address these concerns.
A positive development is that the Professional Board of Psychology has recently indicated that psychological tests classified over ten years ago need to reapply for classification. This is a move in the right direction, but again raises the question of resources – who will conduct the reclassification given the shortage of skilled personnel with psychometric training? These difficulties are coupled with the inordinate cost of internationally developed tests, and a requirement by some test publishers that psychologists and psychometrists complete their costly in-house training before purchasing tests.
In the previous section, we highlighted the strengths in the field of psychological assessment with regards to its contributions to a just and equal society, as well as areas where the field has been less successful, and where is can make a contribution. More work is needed to make psychological assessment more accessible for, and useful to, the majority of people in South Africa. Part of this entails thinking beyond the traditional conceptions of what psychological assessment is. Examples of this can be seen in Osman’s (2013) thoughts on Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) and how it may be extended to the psychological assessment domain. Osman (2013) proposes RPL as a complementary procedure to assessment as it can give insight into an individual’s acquired knowledge and experience. Similarly, Kanjee (2013) stresses that assessment extends beyond the traditional individual and group settings. He proposes that if psychological assessment is to transform itself, large scale studies are a necessity. As the psychological assessment fraternity, it is necessary to think more creatively about ways to achieve this transformation. Milner, Donald and Thatcher (2013) do this by providing an interesting perspective on psychological 13
assessment in the workplace and linking it to issues of transformation. These authors draw on organizational justice theory to address concerns regarding psychological assessment and organizational transformation, and conclude that most assessment research focuses on psychometric testing and meeting legal requirements, with very little attention to the transformation imperatives of the country.
Conclusion It is evident that psychological assessment has had a long and checkered past in South Africa. It cannot deny its inequitable contributions to apartheid ideology. During that dark period, there were some positive aspects, in the attempts to remain current with the most recent, international trends in psychological assessment, such as adaptability testing, dynamic assessment and computerized testing. Today, psychological assessment as a sub-discipline of Psychology lives with its history, as it attempts to form a new, positive identity that contributes meaningfully to a healthy South African society. Research in the field is growing and we are well placed to become world leaders in the area of assessment of diverse populations. However, the field still faces many challenges, such as a lack of skilled personnel to develop and adapt appropriate tests, limited financial support for research and test development and an absence of leadership in the area. Such constraints mean that we need to think more creatively about the process and research of psychological assessment. There is evidence that such innovative reckoning is already underway. Aside from its traditional patterns of research and practice, psychological assessment can contribute meaningfully towards transforming education in the country, assisting with entrepreneurship, promoting early childhood development and enhancing the psychological wellbeing of poor populations in South Africa amongst others. All that is needed is a more unified approach towards psychological assessment.
References
Abrahams, F. (2001). The use and abuse of psychological testing in industry: An overview. In C. Stones (Ed.), Socio-political and psychological perspectives on South Africa (pp. 197-214). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
14
Amod, Z. A family consultation model of child assessment. (2013). In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 461-473). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H. & Dasen, P. R. (2004). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Biesheuvel, S. (1943). African Intelligence. Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations. Bhomke, W. & Tlali, T. (2008). Bodies and behavior: Science, psychology and politics in South Africa (pp. 125-151). In C. van Ommen & D. Painter (Eds.), Interiors: A History of Psychology in South Africa. Pretoria: UNISA Press. Claasen, N.C.W. (1997). Cultural differences, politics and test bias in South Africa. European Review of Applied Psychology, 47, 297-307. Cockcroft, K., Alloway, T., Copello, E., & Milligan, R. (under review). Which aspects of IQ tests are culture fair? A cross-cultural comparison between South African and British students.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Coetzee, N. (2013). Ethical perspectives in assessment. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 409-423). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Cooper, S., Nicholas, L., Seedat, M. & Staatman, J.M. (1990). Psychology and apartheid: The struggle for psychology in South Africa. In L.J. Nicholas and S. cooper (Eds.), Psychology and apartheid: Essays on the struggle for psychology and the mind in South Africa (pp. 1-21). Johannesburg: Vision/Madiba. De Beer, M. (2013). The Learning Potential Computerised Adaptive Test in South Africa. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 137-157). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Dunston, J.T. (1923). Retarded and defective children: Native mentality, mental testing. South African Journal of Science, 20, 148-156. 15
Employment Equity Act (Act No. 55) (1998). Government Gazette Vol. 400, No. 19370, 19 October 1998. Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M.B. (1979). The Dynamic Assessment of Retarded Performers: The Learning Potential Assessment Device, Theory, Instruments and Techniques. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press. Fick, M. L. (1929). South African intelligence tests: Comparisons of various racial groups. Social and Industrial Review, 8, 701-705; 791-794. Foster, D. (2008). Critical psychology: A historical overview (pp. 92-124). In C. van Ommen & D. Painter (Eds.), Interiors: A History of Psychology in South Africa. Pretoria: UNISA Press. Foxcroft, C.C. (1997). Psychological testing in South Africa: Perspectives regarding ethical and fair practices. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 13, 229-235. Foxcroft, C. (2011). Ethical issues related to psychological testing in Africa: What I have learned (so far). In W. J. Lonner, D. L. Dinnel, S. A. Hayes & D. N. Sattler (Eds.), Online readings in psychology and culture (Unit 5, Chapter 4). Retrieved May 16, 2012, from: http://orpc.iaccp.org/index.php?view=article&catid=23%3Achapter&id=45%3Afoxcroft&format =pdf&option=com_content Foxcroft, C. & Davies, C. (2008). Historical perspectives on psychometric testing in South Africa. In C. van Ommen & D. Painter (Eds.), Interiors: A history of psychology in South Africa (pp.152-181). Pretoria: UNISA Press. Foxcroft, C., Paterson, H., Le Roux, N., & Herbst, D. (2004). Psychological assessment in South Africa: A needs analysis. Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council. Foxcroft, C., & Roodt, G. (2013). An Introduction to Psychological Assessment in the South African Context (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Foxcroft, C., Roodt, G. & Abrahams, F. (2013). The practice of psychological assessment: Controlling the use of measures, competing values and ethical practice standards. In C. Foxcroft
16
& G. Roodt (Eds.), An Introduction to Psychological Assessment in the South African Context (4th ed.), (pp.109-124). Cape Town: Oxford University Press. Hill, C., Nel, J., van de Vijver, F., Meiring, D., Valchev, V., Adams, B., & de Bruin, G. (2013). Developing and testing items for the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI). South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 39(1), doi:10.4102/sajip.v39i1.1122 Kanjee, A. (2013). Large-scale assessment studies in South Africa: Trends in reporting results to schools. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 516-534). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Kaliski, S. (2006). Psycho-legal Assessment in South Africa. Cape Town: Oxford University Press, Southern Africa. Laher, S. & Cockcroft, K. (2013a). Current and future trends in psychological assessment in South Africa: Challenges and opportunities. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 535-552). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Laher, S. & Cockcroft, K. (2013b) Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications. Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Leipoldt, C.F.L. (1916). Medical inspection of schools in relation to social efficiency. Report of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the South African Association for the Advancement of Science, Pretoria, July 5-10, 1915, 530-39. Loades, H.R. & Rich, S.G. (1917). Binet tests on South African natives: Zulus. Pedagogical Seminary, 24, 372-380. Maree, K. (2011). Career Counselling: Techniques that work. Cape Town: Juta & Company. Martin, A.L. (1915). Experiments with Binet-simon tests upon African children. Training School Bulletin, 12, 122-123. Macrone, I.D. (1928). Preliminary results from the Porteus Maze Test applied to native school children. South African Journal of Science, 25, 481-484. 17
Milner, K., Donald, F. & Thatcher, A. (2013). Psychological assessment and workplace transformation in South Africa: A review of the research literature. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 488-508). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Moerdyk, A. (2009). The principles and practice of psychological assessment. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers. Nzimande, B. (1995, June). To test or not to test? Paper presented at the Congress on Psychometrics, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Pretoria. Osman, R. (2013). Assessment of prior learning: A South African perspective. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 509-515). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Owen, K. (1989). Test and item bias: The suitability of the Junior Aptitude Test as a common test battery of White, Indian and Black pupils in standard seven. Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council.
Seedat, M. & Mackenzie, S. (2008). The triangulated development of South African psychology: Race, scientific racism and professionalization (pp. 63-91). In C. van Ommen & D. Painter (Eds.), Interiors: A History of Psychology in South Africa. Pretoria: UNISA Press. Sher, D. & Long, W. (2012). Historicising the relevance debate: South African and American psychology in context. South African Journal of Psychology, 42, 564-75. Shuttleworth-Edwards, A., Gaylard, E.K. & Radloff, S.E. (2013). WAIS-III test performance in the South African context: Extension of a prior cross-cultural normative database. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 17-32). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Shuttleworth-Edwards, A., van der Merwe, A.S., van Tonder, P. & Radloff. S.E. (2013). WISCIV test performance in the South African context: A collation of cross-cultural norms. . In S.
18
Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 33-47). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Taylor, T.R. (1987). The Future of Cognitive Assessment. PERS-420. Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council. Taylor, T. (2013). APIL and TRAM learning potential assessment instruments. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 158-168). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Taylor, N. & De Bruin, D. (2013). The Basic Traits Inventory. . In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 232-243). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Taylor, J.M. & Radford, E.J. (1986). Psychometric as an unfair labour practice. South African Journal of Psychology, 16, 79-87 Theron, L.C. (2013). Assessing school readiness using the Junior South African Individual Scales: A pathway to resilience. . In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 60-73). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Tredoux, N. (2013). Using computerized and internet-based testing in South Africa. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 424-442). Johannesburg: Wits University Press. Verster, J.M. (1987). Cross-cultural cognitive research: Some methodological problems and prospects. In K.F. Mauer and A.I. Retief (Eds.), Psychology in Context: Cross-cultural Research Trends in South Africa (pp.65-117). Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19
Watson, M. & McMahon, M. (2013). Qualitative career assessment in South Africa. In S. Laher & K. Cockcroft (Eds.), Psychological Assessment in South Africa: Research and Applications (pp. 474-487). Johannesburg: Wits University Press.
20
