1. RELATIVISM Assoc. Prof. Dr. Şehnaz Şahinkarakaş

2. E THICAL R ELATIVISM Ethical Relativism: no universal/valid standards or rules can be used to guide or evaluate the morality of an act. Morality is relative to the norms of one’s culture. Thus, no common framework for agreement on ethical matters among different societies.

3. Benefits Recognizing the distinction between individual and social values, customs, and moral standards Criticisms 1. Some moral beliefs are culturally relative, but some are not e.g. Dressing may depend on local custom, but slavery, torture may not 2. Ignores individual moral beliefs e.g. If one doesn’t believe in some moral practices of his/her society, then does s/he have to hold the same views?

4. Some claim that relativism does not leave room for moral reforms or improvement in a society. Do you agree?

5. U TILITARIANISM : A C ONSEQUANTIALIST A PPROACH Utilitarianism Making ethical decisions based on a cost-benefit analysis of the consequences of the behavior or action taken. The basic view of utilitarianism is that an action is judged as right, good, or wrong on the basis of its consequences. i.e. The calculated consequences or results of an action

6. Problems with utilitarianism: No agreement exists about the definition of the “good” to be maximized No agreement exists about who decides No criteria to measure the costs and benefits of stakeholders Does not consider the individual Principles of rights and justice are ignored

7. U NIVERSALISM : A D EONTOLOGICAL A PPROACH Also referred to as deontological / nonconsequentialist ethics The rightness or wrongness of an action depends on intrinsic qualities, not on the consequences. Kant’s principle of the categorical imperative: take action considering the way you want others react on this action.

8. The major weaknesses of universalism ( and Kant’s categorical imperative ): Principles are imprecise and lack practical utility Hard to resolve conflicts of interest Does not allow for prioritizing one’s duties

9. C OMPARISON OF E THICAL P RINCIPLES Universalism  Ethical concepts are impartial;  They apply to everyone;  Moral come before self- interest. Utilitarianism  Focuses on the consequences  The action is right if maximum satisfaction is obtained by everyone. Relativism Morals can change according to time, the context, and personal opinions.

10. T WO T HINGS TO D ISCUSS Do you agree?: ‘ People are drowning in a sea of moral relativism. Relativism destroys the conscience. … Ultimately, relativism is self-centred, egoistic and hypocritical. "Doing our own thing” is fine for us, but we don’t want others to be relativists. We expect them to treat us according to an accepted moral standard.’ (Koukl, 2009) Is it possible to accept LTA people as one culture and set standards for this culture?

11. TESTING AND POWER Messick’s validity framework: locating testing with values shows its relation to politics ‘ All language testing is potentially political; it can be associated with power and control ’ (McNamara, 2005). Do you agree?

12. For Shohamy, there are two main sources of power i) their possible detrimental effects on test takers One single test can shape the future of someone (create opportunities or close doors) ii) their use as disciplinary tools Testers hold the power (deciding what and how to test) Test takers can do everything to succeed in tests (changing their behaviours to meet the demands of the test)

13. What about policy makers? What is their role in this process? Tests give policy makers a strong authoritative power E.g. High cutting scores can be used as a gate- keeping mechanism (only few people will pass)

14. Symbolic power of tests on social life Acceptance to higher education institutions Acceptance to citizenship People’s perceptions on the importance of tests even at early ages Then, we can say that tests have power on individuals programs institutions nations.... Is it possible to stop this? For Shohamy, critical language testing can help: test takers should have the right to question the test itself, its value and its methods.

15. For Foucault (Fulcher and Davidson, 2007: 144) all exams are symbols of power and control in education test takers are turned into objects to be measured and classified notion of ‘knowledge’ is a construct, used by the powerful to keep the weak under control What do you think about this?