The Psychologically Literate Citizen: Foundations and Global Perspectives

The Psychologically Literate Citizen This page intentionally left blank The Psychologically Literate Citizen founda...

Author: Dana Dunn

283 downloads 2942 Views 2MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

The Psychologically Literate Citizen

This page intentionally left blank

The Psychologically Literate Citizen foundations and global Perspectives

EDITED BY

Jacquelyn Cranney dana s. dunn

1

1 Oxford University Press, Inc., publishes works that further Oxford University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education. Oxfordâ•… New York Aucklandâ•… Cape Townâ•… Dar es Salaamâ•… Hong Kongâ•… Karachi Kuala Lumpurâ•… Madridâ•… Melbourneâ•… Mexico City Nairobiâ•… New Delhiâ•… Shanghaiâ•… Taipeiâ•… Toronto With offices in Argentinaâ•… Austriaâ•… Brazilâ•… Chileâ•… Czech Republicâ•… Franceâ•… Greece Guatemalaâ•… Hungaryâ•… Italyâ•… Japanâ•… Polandâ•… Portugalâ•… Singapore South Koreaâ•… Switzerlandâ•… Thailandâ•… Turkeyâ•… Ukraineâ•… Vietnam

Copyright © 2011 by Oxford University Press, Inc. Published by Oxford University Press, Inc. 198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016 www.oup.com Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press Oxford University Press is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press, Inc. ______________________________________________________________ Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The psychologically literate citizen : foundations and global perspectives / edited by Jacquelyn Cranney, Dana S. Dunn. â•… p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-0-19-979494-2 (hardcover) 1. Psychology—Study and teaching (Higher) 2. Psychology. I. Cranney, Jacquelyn. II. Dunn, Dana. BF77.P758 2011 150.71—dc22 2010053151 ______________________________________________________________ 1â•‡ 2â•‡ 3â•‡ 4â•‡ 5â•‡ 6â•‡ 7â•‡ 8â•‡ 9 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper

We dedicate this volume to the participants of the “Blueprint” project, and to undergraduate psychology students across the world—may the future be yours.


F o r e wo r d

The P ro m i s e a n d P e r ils o f T h i n k i n g L i k e a P s y ch ol og i s t How wonderful it is to have a volume on the newly emerging construct of psychological literacy. Psychological literacy often starts in the first course in psychology. Introductory Psychology is one of the most popular courses in many universities, and psychology, for many years, has been among the most popular undergraduate majors. If students are going to learn about psychology, why not use it? Why not learn more than just the facts of psychology, but also how to think like a psychologist? In this foreword, I discuss five major challenges of psychological literacy with which we all need to reckon.

1. When Today’s Psychological Literacy Is Tomorrow’s Psychological Illiteracy I came of age as an undergraduate in the waning days of behaviorism, but B. F. Skinner and his cohort were still extremely influential in education and even childrearing. The influence was not merely metaphorical: one year I studied English grammar using a text that was based on Skinnerian learning principles. Although John Watson’s claim that he could transform any child into any type of adult he wanted was not taken wholly seriously, many behavioral (and other) psychologists believed in the almost unlimited power of the environment to shape behavior. Well, that was only my first semester of intro psych. My second semester was a largely Freudian introduction to clinical psychology. My professor put us into a large T-group and, when no one started speaking, he said, “You expect me to be the penis of the group.” That comment did, indeed, get the discussion going. Many of the views—Skinnerian, Freudian, or whatever—that would have constituted psychological literacy then would be considered rather quaint today. Alfred Hitchcock’s Spellbound, for example, was based on Freudian notions of psychology, as were countless other movies of an earlier era. Many of Woody Allen’s films would be impossible to understand without understanding Freud. In the humanities, Freud still plays a dominant role in certain literary criticism, and countless

Foreword

viii

intimate relationships no doubt have been analyzed in terms of Freud’s concepts of the oral, anal, and Oedipus complexes. But going around spouting Skinner or Freud does not have the same cachet in psychology that it once had. So one danger is that today’s psychological literacy will be tomorrow’s psychological illiteracy. We may find that our use of psychological concepts in our daily life will, at some future time, appear to be quaint at best, and misguided at worst. Thankfully, the conceptualization of psychological literacy includes the critical importance of life-long learning (see, for example, the chapters by Cranney and colleagues, and Cranney & Morris), so ideally those who receive a quality undergraduate education in psychology will have the mindset of periodically checking on the currency of the psychological principles they learned during their undergraduate years.

2. The Risks of Over-analysis Anyone who plays golf or tennis knows that there are few better ways to make bad shots than to think carefully and reflectively as one is making a shot. Analyzing the shot as one makes it destroys the shot. The danger of psychology is that one can over-analyze one’s life and the lives of others. Many years ago, I was at a conference and found myself in a curious informal dispute with a colleague. He was a developmental psychologist and said that he and his wife, also a developmental psychologist, religiously applied what they knew about developmental psychology to raising their children. He thought, in particular, that their children could have an edge in school over other children if the parents used their knowledge to push the children along at an accelerated pace through the stages of cognitive development. He believed in the Piagetian stages, but not in the idea that the ages at which children arrive at them are fixed. I said that I sometimes applied the ideas, but was reluctant to use psychology in a highly prescriptive way to rush along my children’s cognitive development. I don’t know what ultimately happened to his children or to him. But I do think there are advantages to joy and spontaneity in life that can be lost if one applies one’s psychology too determinedly to one’s life. Indeed, in one of our studies of love and close relationships (Sternberg, Hojjat, & Barnes, 2001), we found that a lover’s story of a loving relationship in which scientific analysis of the relationship is at the forefront of the relationship is not associated with satisfaction and success. Green and colleagues’ chapter on positive psychology and psychological literacy argues for the integration of the science of positive psychology into education; any psychologically literate graduate should appreciate the benefits of creativity and spontaneity in everyday life.

3. Beyond Knowledge Base The first semester of introductory psychology was a rough experience for me. When I took it, in 1968, it was taught in a way that emphasized factual recall. The tests we received were basically assessments of our factual recall. I received a C in the course

Foreword

ix

and the professor informed me that there was one famous Sternberg in psychology and that there was unlikely to be another. Thirty-five years later I was president of the American Psychological Association and commented to my predecessor, Phil Zimbardo, that it was ironic that the president of APA received a C in intro; he told me that he, too, had gotten a C. Ironically, perhaps, the professor who gave me the C was the chair of the search committee that later hired me to return to Yale, and became one of the most valuable colleagues I ever had. I would like to think that the teaching of psychology has changed greatly since 1968–69. Certainly, the content of the course has changed greatly. But from my experience, the teaching methods used are extremely variable across professors and institutions. There are some faculty members who teach it in a way that inspires reflective thinking, and there are others who teach it for memorization of “facts,” many of which, as I said earlier, will quickly become out of date. It is important to teach psychological literacy in our courses because that is what most will stay with our students, not knowledge of picky facts. One needs knowledge to think reflectively, but rote memorization often leads to an inert knowledge base upon which one is unable to draw to think reflectively. The chapters by McGovern and Bernstein in this volume speak to the need for psychology educators to be role models for psychologically literate citizenship, which would also include taking on the approach of scientist-educator, thus acknowledging the literature on the importance of student engagement and the effectiveness of active learning.

4. The Importance of Analytical, Creative, Practical, and Wise Thinking It is tempting to measure outcomes in terms of tests of so-called critical thinking. A recent book, Academically Adrift (Arum & Roksa, 2011), concludes that students learn virtually nothing in college solely on the basis of test results from a test of critical thinking, the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA), that is closely akin to the SAT. But there are important outcomes of college, in general, and of the study of psychology, in particular, beyond the development of critical thinking. Some of the skills that psychological instruction should develop that go beyond critical thinking include creative, practical, and wise thinking (Sternberg, 1995, 2010a, 2010b). For example, during recent years, a major conflict among psychologists has been regarding the role psychologists should play in military interrogations. The issues involved relate more to wise and ethical thinking than they do to critical thinking. Psychological literacy needs to involve sensitivity to ethical issues as much as to issues of inferential validity and fallacy. These issues are very engagingly addressed in the current volume in the chapters by Davidson and Morrissey, and by Sokol and Kuebli.

5. The Forest and the Trees Much of one’s professional life is coming to terms with what one is as opposed to what one hoped to be. When I started my career, I was thrilled with the big thinkers

Foreword

x

I observed in the field, such as Roger Brown at Harvard, Irving Janis at Yale, Roger Shepard at Stanford, Paul Meehl at Minnesota, and Bob Zajonc at Michigan, to name just a few. But as the years went by, the focus of psychology seemed to move to ever-smaller problems. More and more, the rewards seemed to be for extremely microscopic analysis, in whatever domain. The era of the big thinkers seemed to be over. Whereas the leaders of the previous generation were known to all psychology students, more and more, thought leaders were known to students only in increasingly more specialized fields. My hope is that the field, in its desire to mimic the natural and especially biological sciences, will not increasingly lose sight of the forest for the trees. Students need to be trained in broad areas of psychology, not just in their own specialized area, and in thinking across areas, rather than only within areas. Many of the greatest thinkers in the field—Herbert Simon, George Miller, and Amos Tversky—became great in part because they worked across disciplinary boundaries. Desire for such breadth is implicit in many of the contributions in this book. Psychological literacy is a good idea, but we need to nurture it, care for it, and sometimes be wary of it, for the reasons I’ve just reviewed. In sum, I am delighted that such an important volume on psychological literacy has appeared, and I hope it will spawn many offspring that will continue to develop this important field. Robert J. Sternberg Oklahoma State University Provost and Senior Vice President Stillwater, Oklahoma

References Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift: limited learning on college campuses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sternberg, R. J. (1995). In search of the human mind. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Sternberg, R. J. (2010a). Teaching for ethical reasoning in liberal education. Liberal Education, 96(3), 32–37. Sternberg, R. J. (2010b). WICS: a new model for cognitive education. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 9, 34–46. Sternberg, R., Hojjat, M., & Barnes, M. L. (2001). Empirical tests of aspects of a theory of love as a story. European Journal of Personality, 15, 199–218.

P r efac e

Our hope for this volume is that undergraduate psychology educators, curriculum designers, and policy creators will be inspired to re-examine the aims of undergraduate psychology education, and as a consequence reshape pedagogy and curriculum, thus better preparing our students for their increasingly uncertain but potentially very exciting futures. This book was inspired by our involvement in the project that produced the volume Undergraduate Education in Psychology: A Blueprint for the Future of the Discipline (Halpern, 2010a). Jacky, who has been involved in national psychology undergraduate education in Australia for several years, was privileged to be invited to contribute to the first chapter, which outlined the two key concepts pursued in this volume, psychologi cal literacy and the psychologically literate citizen (McGovern et al., 2010). Dana has long contributed to policy and guidelines regarding outcomes and assessment in undergraduate psychology education in the United States, and he led the chapter on defining a core curriculum for undergraduate psychology in the “Blueprint” volume (Dunn et al., 2010). The “Blueprint” volume has already been described as a classic in the field, and was thus deserving of immediate follow-up, with the focus being on expanding the theory and practice around the paradigmatic concepts of psychological literacy and the psychologically literate citizen. McGovern and colleagues (2010) explicitly referred to the global implications of those concepts, and the current volume sought to extend the work of the “Blueprint” volume beyond the shores of the United States. Although most of the chapters were written by U.S. and Australian authors, there are several chapters written by education leaders on other continents, and the chapter by Dudgeon and colleagues gives a distinctly non-Western perspective. Essentially, the primary aim of this volume was to provide some answers from across the world on the “why” and “how” of educating the psychologically literate citizen—the proposed universal outcome of the psychology major. That is, this volume extends into global territories of the paradigm-shifting disciplinary movement initiated by the “Blueprint” volume. It simultaneously links traditional approaches and concepts in psychology to these new concepts in a transformative manner, and provides practical suggestions for embedding these concepts in everyday teaching practice.

xii

Preface

In the introductory chapter, we develop further McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) concepts of psychological literacy and the psychologically literate citizen, in particular by making reference to understandings, from diverse sources, of the concepts of literacy, scientific literacy, citizenship, and global citizenship. The section on “Curriculum Perspectives” addresses several key pedagogical and curriculum aspects such as program structure, core content areas, and key skills. Dunn and coworkers open the section with a consideration of how student learning outcomes related to psychological literacy might shape disciplinary curricula for undergraduates, acknowledging the necessary balance between graduate and undergraduate needs, the balance between cutting-edge and core knowledge, and the need to take a more global perspective. In the context of the increasing complexity of current and projected everyday living, Halpern and Butler argue that critical thinking is a core component of psychological literacy, and Davidson and Morrissey argue that “ethical literacy” is a core component of psychologically literate citizenship. Both of these chapters contain examples and clear links to useful classroom teaching strategies, so that educators can immediately start to integrate this material into their curriculum. White evaluates the social psychological research literature on effective prejudice reduction strategies to promote intergroup harmony and then outlines how students can directly experience and learn from these specific evidence-based strategies to reduce intergroup conflict, both within and outside the classroom. Dudgeon and associates give an indigenous perspective on the history of psychology in Australia, and suggest strategies for initiating the development of cultural competence in the undergraduate psychology program. As they argue, there needs to be increased emphasis on the development of cultural competence in an increasingly globalized world, as well as in countries where First Nation peoples are clearly disadvantaged. It should be noted that this volume explicitly attempts to moderate the use of the dominant Western psychology language without undermining the psychological science that must be both the content and the practice of education in psychology. Burton and McDonald point out that psychology educators are uniquely situated to help students develop aspects of psychological literacy (e.g., critical thinking, selfknowledge) that would (a) be helpful in the transition process for all first-year psychology students, regardless of the program they are undertaking, and (b) build toward university aspirational goals of developing “global citizens.” Thus, they argue that the development of psychological literacy should be the primary aim of firstyear psychology courses. Denson and Ing outline developmental psychology and educational psychology theory relevant to understanding the nature of undergraduate students and their learning processes, and particularly as relevant to different forms of diversity in the university context. They then present evidence for the positive association between culturally diverse classrooms and the development of psychologically literate skills such as critical thinking. Green and colleagues argue for the value of a positive psychology approach in the undergraduate curriculum and how this relates to psychological literacy; they then give examples of evidence-based positive psychology interventions within the curriculum. Halonen and associates

Preface

xiii

provide a comprehensive model for assessing psychological literacy, which is conceptualized as a multilayered developmental model. Finally in this section, Cranney and coworkers argue that students should be given the opportunity to purposefully apply the basic principles of psychology to new problems or in new situations, in an experiential and active manner. They briefly consider the background to the issue of “applied” psychology in undergraduate education, and then give some concrete examples of how applied psychology learning and teaching strategies can be implemented to support the development of psychological literacy. In the “Global Perspectives” section, national leaders in undergraduate psychology education were challenged to discuss the relevance of the two concepts from their particular national perspectives. From the Italian perspective, Job and coauthors identify four features that would allow students to develop psychological literacy during their undergraduate education, and include examples of how psychological literacy is being developed and displayed. Sarwono argues that psychology in Indonesia has been fostering psychological literacy in its students, in its researchers, and also in its population (through the popular media) for the past 60 years. Trapp and Akhurst’s chapter considers the challenging concept of citizenship, particularly in the context of current pressures on undergraduate psychology education in the United Kingdom. They argue that existing course specifications and the U.K. benchmark statements define a high level of psychological literacy. Karandashev contrasts the professionally oriented undergraduate programs that have been typical for Russia (as well as for many European and South American countries) with the liberal arts education tradition typical for the United Kingdom, Australia, and North America. He also emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between general and professional psychological literacy, as well as recognizing different conceptualizations of psychological literacy across cultures. Harré and associates point out that the current ecological crisis is of enormous relevance to psychology teaching, as it is essentially a problem of human behavior. They urge psychology educators to consider how they can nurture the psychologically literate citizen through a focus on ecological sustainability, and present four learning and teaching cases designed to increase student psychological literacy in this important area. Charlton and Lymburner consider how educators can foster the development of psychologically literate global citizenship in their psychology students, and discuss how psychological literacy may manifest itself through some of the key social issues facing Canadians today: volunteerism, environmental sustainability, illicit drug use, healthcare, and multiculturalism and diversity. Methods and examples of how to foster psychological literacy are presented through classroom exercises, case studies, and curriculum development. Cranney and Morris open the section on “Integrative Perspectives” by considering the relationship between psychological literacy and adaptive cognition, defined as global ways of thinking (and consequently behaving) that are beneficial to one’s (and others’) survival and well-being. The adaptive cognition approach draws on a number of perspectives in psychology, including developmental psychology, evolutionary psychology, cultural psychology, and human ecology. Cranney and Morris argue that we are in the privileged position of being able to choose to use strategies

Preface

xiv

that we know will improve our chances of achieving the goals of living a purposeful and fulfilling life, and psychology education is one arena in which this perspective can be shared and experienced. Building on Martin Luther King, Jr.’s claim that “Intelligence plus characterâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯.â•¯is the goal of true education,” Sokol and Kuebli explore the parallels between character development and psychological literacy. They argue, in particular, that promoting the skills of psychological literacy must be balanced against principles of citizenship and community in order to avoid the dangers of instrumental reasoning. Bernstein extends the notion of the “scientisteducator” introduced in the “Blueprint” volume and cogently explores the process whereby a scientist-practitioner would seek to provide students with opportunities to develop into psychologically literate citizens. McGovern argues that psychology educators are ideal role models for the psychologically literate citizen and outlines a program for faculty development and sustained renewal that can make explicit the connections between psychological literacy, citizenship, and virtues and character strengths. In their consideration of the alumnus perspective on psychological literacy, Takooshian and Landi present data that clearly demonstrate the increasing number of psychology honors graduates, which again raises the issue of what students acquire during a psychology major, particularly as very few undertake further study in psychology. In the final chapter, we reconsider the concepts of psychological literacy and global psychologically literate citizenship in light of the previous chapters. We argue that there is a global need for the development of psychological literacy in the general population, and undergraduate psychology education is an opportunity that cannot be ignored if we as psychology educators are ourselves psychologically literate. The aims of undergraduate psychology education in several countries are briefly and selectively reviewed, and we argue that the development of psychological literacy is compatible with current aims. We then provide some examples of renewed curricular and pedagogical strategies to enable undergraduate students to gain psychological literacy. We build on Halpern’s (2010b) “Call to Action” to psychology educators to reinvent their pedagogy and curriculum to better meet the needs of our students who will best serve themselves and lead their local and global communities by developing a high level of psychological literacy—that is, by becoming psychologically literate global citizens.

References Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Halpern, D. F. (Ed.). (2010a). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.

Preface

xv

Halpern, D. F. (2010b). Introduction: a call to action. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Under graduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the dis cipline’s future (pp. 9–28). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.


Ac k n ow l e d g m e n t s

Jacky and Dana wish to thank the team at Oxford, particularly Abby Gross and Joanna Ng, for shepherding the book to publication. Smitha Raj’s careful attention to detail steered the book through the production process. Jacky would like to thank the authors for their motivation to produce thoughtful and original contributions to this volume—in taking up the challenge, the authors ensured that both the process and the product surpassed the original aims for this volume. Let’s continue to work toward achieving the promise inherent in the concepts of psychological literacy and the psychologically literate global citizen. Jacky is eternally grateful to Dana for being a wonderful co-editor—she could not have wished for a better partner in this endeavor. Thanks also to Minshin Song and Jun Mo Jeong for creative assistance with the original cover design image. The University of New South Wales and the Australian Learning and Teaching Council provided the space and stimulation that allowed these ideas and this volume to mature. Jacky thanks her family and friends, including colleagues (Diane and Sue–your encouragement is invaluable), who continually challenge and support her learning–this would not have been possible without you all. As always, Dana appreciates his family’s love and support of his scholarly work. Moravian College continues to provide him with the freedom to pursue his interests. He again thanks Abby Gross for being an ideal editor (third time is a charm, Abby). He is also grateful to the Executive Committee of the Society for the Teaching of Psychology for giving him a smooth presidency in 2010, which allowed him to find some time to work on this book. And finally, Dana wants to thank his hardworking, kind, and thoughtful colleague Jacky Cranney, for inviting him to be co-pilot on this wonderful project; she is now an old friend.


C on t e n t s

Contributorsâ•‡ xxiii PART ONEâ•‡ Introduction 1. Psychological Literacy and the Psychologically Literate Citizen: New Frontiers for a Global Disciplineâ•‡ 3 Jacquelyn Cranney and Dana S. Dunn PART TWOâ•‡ Curriculum Perspectives 2. Curriculum Matters: Structure, Content, and Psychological Literacyâ•‡ 15 Dana S. Dunn, Robin L. Cautin, and Regan A. R. Gurung 3. Critical Thinking and the Education of Psychologically Literate Citizensâ•‡ 27 Diane F. Halpern and Heather A. Butler 4. Enhancing Ethical Literacy of Psychologically Literate Citizensâ•‡ 41 Graham R. Davidson and Shirley A. Morrissey 5. The Social Psychology of Intergroup Harmony and the Education of Psychologically Literate Citizensâ•‡ 56 Fiona A. White 6. Changing the Lens: Indigenous Perspectives on Psychological Literacyâ•‡ 72 Pat Dudgeon, Dawn Darlaston-Jones, and Yvonne Clark 7. Introductory Psychology and Psychological Literacyâ•‡ 91 Lorelle J. Burton and Kathie J. McDonald 8. Educational Psychology and Psychological Literacy in Higher Education: Developmental and Cultural Aspects of Racial Diversityâ•‡ 104 Nida Denson and Marsha Ing 9. The Role of Positive Psychology in Creating the Psychologically Literate Citizenâ•‡ 119 Suzy Green, Paula L. Robinson, and Lindsay G. Oades

xx

Contents

10. Departmental Program Approaches for Educating Psychologically Literate Citizensâ•‡ 131 Jane S. Halonen, Dana S. Dunn, Suzanne Baker, and Maureen A. McCarthy 11. Psychological Literacy and Applied Psychology in Undergraduate Educationâ•‡ 146 Jacquelyn Cranney, Sue Morris, Frances H. Martin, Steve Provost, Lucy Zinkiewicz, John Reece, Josephine Milne-Home, Lorelle J. Burton, Fiona A. White, Judi Homewood, Joanne K. Earl, and Sherri McCarthy PART THREEâ•‡ Global Perspectives 12. Psychological Literacy: An Italian Perspectiveâ•‡ 167 Remo Job, Lorella Lotto, and Claudio Tonzar 13. An Indonesian Perspective on Psychological Literacyâ•‡ 178 Sarlito Wirawan Sarwono 14. A U.K. Perspective on Psychological Literacy and Citizenshipâ•‡ 191 Annie Trapp and Jacqueline Akhurst 15. Psychological Literacy Goals in Psychology Teaching in Russian Educationâ•‡ 206 Victor Karandashev 16. Sustainability and the Psychologically Literate Citizen: A New Zealand Perspectiveâ•‡ 220 Niki Harré, Taciano L. Milfont, William Helton, and Andrea Mead 17. Fostering Psychologically Literate Citizens: A Canadian Perspectiveâ•‡ 234 Steve Charlton and Jocelyn Lymburner PART FOURâ•‡ Integrative Perspectives 18. Adaptive Cognition and Psychological Literacyâ•‡ 251 Jacquelyn Cranney and Sue Morris 19. Psychological Literacy: Bridging Citizenship and Characterâ•‡ 269 Bryan W. Sokol and Janet E. Kuebli 20. A Scientist-Educator Perspective on Psychological Literacyâ•‡ 281 Daniel Bernstein

Contents

21. Virtues and Character Strengths of Psychologically Literate Facultyâ•‡ 296 Thomas V. McGovern 22. Psychological Literacy: An Alumni Perspectiveâ•‡ 306 Harold Takooshian and Giulia Landi 23. What the World Needs Now Is Psychological Literacyâ•‡ 322 Jacquelyn Cranney and Dana S. Dunn Indexâ•‡ 337

xxi


C on t r i bu to r s

Jacqueline Akhurst Principal Lecturer Department of Psychology York St. John University York, United Kingdom

Robin L. Cautin Professor and Chair Department of Psychology Manhattanville College Purchase, New York

Suzanne Baker Professor Department of Psychology James Madison University Harrisonburg, Virginia

Steve Charlton Faculty Member Department of Psychology Kwantlen Polytechnic University Richmond, Canada

Daniel Bernstein Professor Department of Psychology University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas

Yvonne Clark Senior Lecturer School of Psychology University of Adelaide Adelaide, Australia

Lorelle J. Burton Associate Professor Department of Psychology University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba, Australia

Jacquelyn Cranney Associate Professor School of Psychology The University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia

Heather A. Butler Doctoral Student School of Behavioral and Organizational Sciences Claremont Graduate University Claremont, California

Dawn Darlaston-Jones Head, Behavioral Science School of Arts & Sciences University of Notre Dame Fremantle, Australia

Contributors

xxiv

Graham R. Davidson Emeritus Professor and Lecturer Graduate School of Psychology Assumption University, ABAC Bangkok, Thailand

Jane S. Halonen Dean College of Arts and Sciences University of West Florida Pensacola, Florida

Nida Denson Research Fellow Centre for Educational Research University of Western Sydney Milperra, Australia

Diane F. Halpern Professor Department of Psychology Claremont McKenna College Claremont, California

Pat Dudgeon Adjunct Professor Postdoctoral Research Fellow School of Indigenous Studies University of Western Australia Crawley, Australia

Niki Harré Associate Professor Department of Psychology The University of Auckland Auckland, New Zealand

Dana S. Dunn Professor Department of Psychology Moravian College Bethlehem, Pennsylvania Joanne K. Earl Senior Lecturer School of Psychology University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia Suzy Green Co-Founder, Positive Psychology Institute Adjunct Lecturer Coaching Psychology Unit University of Sydney Sydney, Australia Regan A. R. Gurung Professor Department of Psychology University of Wisconsin Green Bay, Wisconsin

William Helton Associate Professor Department of Psychology University of Canterbury Christchurch, New Zealand Judi Homewood Associate Professor Department of Psychology Macquarie University Sydney, Australia Marsha Ing Assistant Professor Graduate School of Education University of California–Riverside Riverside, California Remo Job Department of Cognitive Science and Education University of Trento Trento, Italy

Contributors

Victor Karandashev Professor Department of Psychology Aquinas College Grand Rapids, Michigan Leningrad State University St. Petersburg, Russia Janet E. Kuebli Associate Professor Department of Psychology Saint Louis University St. Louis, Missouri Giulia Landi Medical Student School of Medicine and Surgery University of Bologna Italy Lorella Lotto Associate Professor Department of Developmental Psychology and Socialization University of Padova Padova, Italy Jocelyn Lymburner Faculty Member Department of Psychology Kwantlen Polytechnic University Surrey, Canada Frances H. Martin Associate Professor School of Psychology University of Tasmania Hobart, Australia Maureen A. McCarthy Professor Department of Psychology Kennesaw State University Kennesaw, Georgia

xxv

Sherri McCarthy Professor of Educational Psychology, Counseling and Human Relations Northern Arizona University Yuma Branch Campus Yuma, Arizona Kathie J. McDonald Post-Graduate Psychology Student Department of Psychology University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba, Australia Thomas V. McGovern Professor of Psychology New College of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences Arizona State University West Phoenix, Arizona Andrea Mead Senior Tutor Department of Pychology The University of Auckland Auckland, New Zealand Taciano L. Milfont Senior Lecturer School of Psychology Victoria University of Wellington Wellington, New Zealand Josephine Milne-Home Associate Head of School Learning and Teaching University of Western Sydney Sydney, Australia Sue Morris Research Associate School of Psychology The University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia

Contributors

xxvi

Shirley A. Morrissey Associate Professor and Deputy Head of School School of Psychology Griffith University–Gold Coast Southport, Australia

Bryan W. Sokol Assistant Professor Department of Psychology Saint Louis University St. Louis, Missouri

Lindsay G. Oades Senior Lecturer School of Psychology University of Wollongong Wollongong, Australia

Harold Takooshian Professor of Psychology and Urban Studies Department of Psychology Fordham University New York, New York

Steve Provost Lecturer School of Health & Human Sciences Southern Cross University Coffs Harbour, Australia

Claudio Tonzar Assistant Professor Department of Human Sciences University of Urbino Urbino, Italy

John Reece Associate Professor Discipline of Psychology School of Health Sciences RMIT University Bundoora, Australia

Annie Trapp Director Higher Education Academy Psychology Network University of York York, United Kingdom

Paula L. Robinson Co-Founder, Positive Psychology Institute Doctoral Student and Guest Lecturer School of Psychology University of Wollongong Wollongong, Australia

Fiona A. White Associate Professor School of Psychology University of Sydney Sydney, Australia

Sarlito Wirawan Sarwono Professor Department of Psychology University of Indonesia Depok, Indonesia

Lucy Zinkiewicz Lecturer School of Psychology Deakin University Geelong, Australia

PART ONE

Introduction


1 Psychological Literacy and the Psychologically Literate Citizen New Frontiers for a Global Discipline J ac qu e ly n Cr a n n e y a n d Da n a S. D un n

Today’s students must prepare themselves for a world in which knowledge is accumulating at a rapidly accelerating rate and in which old problems such as poverty, racism, and pollution join new problems such as global terrorism, a health crisis created by alarming increases in obesity, and the growing gap between the poor and very rich. All of these problems require psychological knowledge, skills and values for their solution. Halpern (2010, p. 162) Although the psychology major remains very popular (88,000 bachelor’s degrees in 2006)—and an increasing percentage of our citizens attend college—most students will not major in our discipline. However, psychol ogy is second only to basic English composition as the most frequently taken course by college graduates, and our potential to affect our future citizenry is enormous. Yet I sometimes wonder how much of what we teach is based on what we want to teach about our discipline (our favored theories and concepts to those we hope to recruit to our field—a most worthy endeavor) and how much is based on what the average person needs to know to be a psychologically literate citizen. Belar (2008, p. 56)

4

A

T he P s y c h o l o g i c a l ly Lite r ate Citi z e n

s educators and psychologists, we believe we have a mandate to prepare students to adapt and survive in their current and future world. More over, we believe that both the teaching and learning of psychological knowledge can serve in this pressing capacity. To this end, we discuss and develop further McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) concepts of “psychological literacy” and the “psychologically literate citizen,” in particular by making reference to the common understandings of the concepts of literacy, citizenship, and global citizenship. To begin, we will provide some historical context. In the northern summer of 2008, about 80 professors of undergraduate (UG) psychology gathered for the National Conference on Undergraduate Education in Psychology at the Univer sity of Puget Sound. Under the leadership of Diane Halpern, the conference aim was to undertake the core work in developing nine chapters for the volume Undergraduate Psychology Education: A Blueprint for the Future of the Discipline (Halpern, 2010). This book was in some sense an update of the 1991 St. Mary’s Conference, which had resulted in McGovern’s (1993) Handbook for Enhancing Undergraduate Education in Psychology. The Blueprint book also acknowledged some core developments since the McGovern work, including The APA Guidelines for the Undergraduate Major (APA, 2007), which listed five psychology-specific and five liberal education-related capabilities, and associated student learning outcomes (SLOs), for the UG psychology major in the United States. McGovern and colleagues (2010) introduced the unifying concepts of “psycho logical literacy” and “the psychologically literate citizen.” Psychological literacy means: • “having a well-defined vocabulary and basic knowledge of the critical subject matter of psychology; • valuing the intellectual challenges required to use scientific thinking and the disciplined analysis of information to evaluate alternative courses of action; • taking a creative and amiable skeptic approach to problem solving; • applying psychological principles to personal, social, and organizational issues in work, relationships, and the broader community; • acting ethically; • being competent in using and evaluating information and technology; • communicating effectively in different modes and with many different audiences; • recognizing, understanding, and fostering respect for diversity; • being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behavior and mental processes” (p. 11). In essence, psychological literacy encapsulates the common graduate attributes or capabilities that students should acquire while undertaking a major in psychol ogy, as exemplified by guidelines and lists of SLOs delineated by many national psychology organizations (e.g., United States: APA, 2007; Australia: Cranney

Psychological Literacy and the Psychologically Literate Citizen

5

et al., 2008; Europe: Lunt et al., 2001). Although psychology educators interna tionally have been working toward helping students to acquire these attributes for at least the past 50 years, it has been only recently that educators have explicitly delineated attributes and SLOs and have sought to develop appropriate teaching and assessment strategies, including whole-program approaches. From some per spectives, psychological literacy becomes the most important outcome of under graduate education in the discipline. The concept of the psychologically literate citizen, however, is more controver sial than that of psychological literacy, for at least three reasons. First, it raises the issue of the real purpose of UG psychology education (and perhaps higher educa tion generally). Whether stated or implied, the aim in most Western countries is for UG education to provide the foundations for graduate professional training in psychology. Yet in North America, Australia, and Britain, only about one quarter of psychology majors enter graduate professional training programs (e.g., Landrum, Hettich, & Wilner, 2010), so there must be other viable outcomes for psychology major graduates. One purpose that fits particularly well in the North American context is that of liberal education. Indeed, many have argued that the psychology major is possibly one of the best forms of liberal education (e.g., McGovern, Furumoto, Halpern, Kimble, & McKeachie, 1991). The purpose of liberal education is to teach people to write well, reason logically, identify connections among diverse sets of information, recognize what they know and what they still need to learn, engage in critical thinking, and rely on research and data analytic skills to verify observations and conclusions (Dunn & McCarthy, 2010). This notion fits well with the recently stated purpose of universities in many countries to create the so-called “global citizen,” which has been simply defined as “anyone who works to make the world a better place” (Victoria International Development Education Association, n.d.), while global citizen ship “involves understanding the forces that affect cross-cultural connections and being committed to a global community based on human interdependence, equality, and justice” (Franklin Pierce University, n.d.). We explore these concepts further below. A second reason for controversy is a reaction by many within and outside of universities against the word “citizen,” and the implication that higher education institutions should be promoting and encouraging citizenship. We argue, how ever, that the purpose of colleges and universities is to provide students with the kind of education that enables them to participate and provide leadership in both their communities and their nations, whatever form that may take. Indeed, for democratic societies, education is one of the cornerstones of citizenry. A third reason for controversy is that McGovern and colleagues (2010) do not really define “the psychologically literate citizen,” but rather give the sense of a complex process that evolves over time: Psychologically literate citizens intentionally build upon their own psycho logical literacy, integrating it with the interdisciplinary and extracurricular lessons learned during their undergraduate experiences. They try to grow

6


more sophisticated as ethical and socially responsible problem solvers. It is an achievable outcome when faculty provide students with opportunities to use their psychological literacy outside of formal learning environments, and they begin to do so of their own initiative to accomplish goals that are impor tant to them, their families, their colleagues, their communities, and to the larger society, state, nation, or world. (p. 20) McGovern and colleagues (2010) clearly see this concept as an aspirational but achievable outcome of UG education that builds upon psychological literacy, and that also “pulls in” transdisciplinary and other “real-life” experiences. They further discuss the notion of “intentional learners” as those who are “empowered by intellectual and practical skills, informed by knowledge and different ways of knowing, and ethically responsible for their personal actions and civic contri butions” (p. 21); the notion of integrative learning is also described as connecting skills and knowledge from multiple domains, and as applying theory to practice in various settings. Although McGovern and colleagues do not offer a discrete defi nition of the psychologically literate citizen, Halpern (2010) does, in her introduc tion to the Blueprint book: “Psychologically literate citizens have basic knowledge of psychology and can and will apply their knowledge of psychology to a broad range of situations” (p. 7). We expand on this concept in a later section as well.

The Concepts of “Literacy” and “Psychological Literacy” If students encounter a concept or term that they know little about, they are very likely to seek more information on the open-source community-driven encyclo pedia, Wikipedia. Thus, as educators, we decided to embrace the role of student as learner and approach the term “literacy” in the same way. Wikipedia states that literacy has “traditionally been described as the ability to read and write. It is a concept claimed and defined by a range of different theoretical fields” (see http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy). Interestingly, the entry then draws on a docu ment authored by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which defines literacy as the “ability to identify, under stand, interpret, create, communicate, compute and use printed and written mate rials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society” [italics added] (UNESCO, 2004). It is well documented that this kind of literacy is associated with better life opportunities and better physical health outcomes—which is why UNESCO has a focus on such “basic” education in developing countries and also why, in Western countries, we generally take this kind of literacy for granted (despite the fact that a significant percentage of our populations remain illiterate). In a similar way, we argue that, in the face of global problems that are the result of maladaptive human behavior (Marsella, 2007), psychological literacy may well


7

become essential to the psychological health of both Western and “developing” nations—that is, it may be necessary to purposefully increase the psychological literacy of our citizens, either through formal education (e.g., the psychology major) or through informal education media (e.g., “edutainment” formats; or the “critical thinking” game being developed by Halpern and others; see http://www. cmc.edu/pages/faculty/dhalpern/index_files/Page792.html). Returning to the formal literature on “literacy,” we do not pretend to be experts in this field, but rather take as an interesting example the article entitled “Literacy Literacy” by Kintgen (1988) in the journal Visible Language. Therein the author examines how the traditional meaning of the word has been extended to terms such as “scientific literacy” and “cultural literacy.” Kintgen summarizes scholarly work that traces the four historical stages of development of the meaning of the core term “literacy,” concluding that we are now in the “analytic” stage, where “readers are expected to analyze and draw inferences from the material they read” (p. 154). By logically generalizing the term to other fields, he argues that “the ability to analyze material from any field, and to draw inferences from it, can be referred to as literacy in that area” (p. 154). However, he also argues that there is an evaluative element to the term that encompasses the analysis and inference aspects, and goes beyond mere descriptive aspects. In essence, literacy means the capacity to both “describe knowledge, and the ability to think, about any field” (p. 155), and also implies mastery of a traditional body of knowledge (p. 162). In his discussion of “cultural literacy,” he explicitly makes reference to psychological notions, such as mental models and schemas, as being essential to comprehension. Finally he states: New experiences of any sort are assimilated by relating them to mental models based on previous experiences; something that is totally novel is incomprehensible. Knowledge is thus an essential component of even the descriptive sense of ‘literacy’, and this leads, almost inevitably, to knowledge as the defining characteristic of the evaluative sense. And thus the title of this paper. (Kintgen, 1988, p. 166) What are the implications of Kintgen’s (1988) analysis for the term “psychologi cal literacy”? First, he acknowledges the importance of the development of a “schema” regarding the discipline of psychology; we argue that his notion of “schema” overlaps with the notion of the “culture” of the discipline, including the sometimes-not-so-explicit rules about the way one thinks if one is a psychologist (or psychological scientist; Cranney et al., 2005; Ewing et al., 2010). This aspect of literacy, which acknowledges that part of the discipline knowledge is “ways of knowing,” can be related to the notion of epistemology. Second, he emphasizes the higher-order cognitive skills of analysis and evaluation, which can be related to Krathwohl’s (2002) revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. In terms of types of knowledge, the levels are factual, conceptual, and procedural knowledge, and the highest level is metacognitive knowledge—the knowledge of cognition in general as well as awareness and knowledge of one’s own thinking. In terms of types of processes, the lowest level is remembering, whereas the highest levels involve

8


evaluating and creating. Third, Kintgen refers to conceptions of scientific literacy as including the ability to evaluate the wider implications of the products of scien tific enterprise on society generally (p. 157); in a similar way, we might also consider as part of psychological literacy the capacity to evaluate the past and predict the future impact of psychological science on society generally. One aspect of this capacity is being able to recognize the strengths and limitations or boundaries of disciplinary knowledge in the context of other disciplines and other knowledge— “meta-metacognition”? In a further play on Kintgen’s paper title, we need to acknowledge that a particularly unusual aspect of psychological literacy (at least compared to other literacies) is that the subject of the literacy is not something external to us, but indeed is the essence of ourselves—our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. This realization has profound implications for the importance of psycho logical literacy to oneself and one’s fellow human beings, and may also mean that gaining psychological literacy is a particularly challenging enterprise, as it requires one to attempt to hold an objective view of self-relevant subject matter. We argue that a simple definition of literacy is “domain knowledge that is used adaptively,” or more specifically, literacy is “knowledge plus the adaptive use or application of that knowledge.” Thus psychological literacy could be defined as psychological knowledge that is used adaptively. Taking into consideration the Wikipedia, UNESCO, and English scholar’s definitions, however, this definition is not, for many reasons, as simple as it seems. First, use of knowledge implies that one has knowledge to begin with. Second, here “knowledge” includes not only the core content areas, but all the aspects defined by McGovern and coworkers (2010), including critical thinking, research skills, and communication. Third, knowledge also includes ethical knowledge, and we argue that a high level of knowledge acquisition in this area necessarily means that “adaptive use” translates to ethical behavior in all domains of life, not just in the workplace. Fourth, this definition of psychological literacy implies a relatively well-integrated and functional set of schemas that across individuals may show some variability in expression, but in terms of central tendency, can be recognized and assessed as “psychological liter acy.” Finally, regardless of the discipline students decide to pursue, opportunities to develop some aspects of psychological literacy, such as “recognizing, under standing, and fostering respect for diversity” (McGovern et al., 2010), should be formally included in their curriculum to help create truly “global citizens.” Before we move on to notions of citizenship, however, two points should be made. First, different cultures may have different conceptualizations of “psycho logical literacy,” as Karandashev (Chapter 15) makes clear in his discussion of the concept in relation to the history of psychology education in Russia. Second, because a central characteristic of psychology is the use of the scientific method, we also need to consider the concept of “scientific literacy”: Scientific literacy is the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity . . . Scientific literacy means that . . . a person has the ability to describe, explain, and predict


9

natural phenomena. Scientific literacy entails being able to read with under standing articles about science in the popular press and to engage in social conversation about the validity of the conclusions. Scientific literacy implies that a person can identify scientific issues underlying national and local decisions and express positions that are scientifically and technologically informed. A literate citizen should be able to evaluate the quality of scientific information on the basis of its source and the methods used to generate it. Scientific literacy also implies the capacity to pose and evaluate arguments based on evidence and to apply conclusions from such arguments appropri ately (National Science Education Standards, cited by http://literacynet.org/ science/scientificliteracy.html). This definition of scientific literacy fits well with both Kintgen’s (1988) defini tion of literacy emphasizing its evaluative aspects, and our definition emphasizing its adaptive application aspects. Many psychology educators have explicitly stated that scientific literacy is a core attribute that should be acquired by every psychol ogy major (e.g., Beins, 2007). There are challenges to educators in achieving this aim, particularly with students who may not have a science background and who expect primarily to learn “how to help people” during their UG program (e.g., Thieman, Clary, Olson, Dauner, & Ring, 2009); Holmes and Beins (2009) suggest some potential solutions to these challenges.

The Concepts of “Citizen,” “Global Citizenship,” and the “Psychologically Literate Citizen” During the week-long “camp” that produced the core drafts of the Blueprint book (Halpern, 2010), there was some ambivalence about the word “citizen” as it emerged in discussions from the developing chapter dealing with “The Psycho logically Literate Citizen” (McGovern et al., 2010). This ambivalence no doubt reflected different meanings associated with the term (keep in mind the likely “small-L” liberal political leanings of most psychology professors present, in the context of the dominant conservative U.S. government at that time). The notion of citizenship is central in the development of Western civilization and in particular democratic societies, and so has strong cultural meanings. A comprehensive treat ment of this concept is beyond the scope of this chapter (but see Trapp & Akhurst, Chapter 14). However, to introduce this section, we give the following definition: a citizen is a “person owing loyalty to and entitled by birth or naturalisation to the protection of state or nation” (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/citizen). Citizen ship developed as a concept in the Classical era, where there were clearly signifi cant rights and responsibilities (the former outweighing the latter, particularly when non-citizenship often meant slavery) associated with Athenian and Roman citizenry (see, for example, Scullard, 1982, pp. 16–18). Finally, we note that citi zenship is one of the character strengths of the virtue of justice (Peterson & Seligman, 2004; see also Dahlsgaard, Peterson, & Selgman, 2005).

10


If one conducts a search for “global citizenship,” one most often retrieves uni versity or college statements of the aspirational capabilities or attributes they hope to inculcate in their graduates. For example, Australia’s University of New South Wales recently defined global citizens as having an appreciation of (a) relevant applications of their discipline to problems in their local, national, and interna tional context, and (b) the needs to respect diversity, be culturally aware, be socially just/responsible, and be environmentally responsible (Marshall, 2010). This definition pushes strongly into the “values” arena, and contrasts with unin formative conceptualizations of global citizenship as being merely the conse quence of study abroad experiences, or as reflecting the capacity to communicate with people from around the world through Web-based social media (although there is no doubt that these experiences and capabilities have value). If we take Marshall’s (2010) definition, then how does this relate to the “psy chologically literate citizen”? We build upon McGovern and coworkers’ (2010) discussion around these issues by arguing that psychologically literate citizens use their psychological literacy to solve problems in an ethical and socially responsi ble manner in a way that directly benefits their communities. That is, they self lessly and sometimes courageously share their psychological knowledge and skills to directly benefit their communities, large or small. For an alternative but related conceptualization of this concept, see Charlton and Lymburner’s (Chapter 17) “psychologically literate global citizen.”

Conclusion In summary, we argue that psychological literacy is a core component of grad uate literacy in general, and that the psychologically literate citizen is a core com ponent of the “global citizen,” thus providing relevance to tertiary education in general. Psychological literacy should be the core outcome of the psychology UG major. Depending on how one conceptualizes “the psychologically literate citizen,” one might see it as the “high end” of psychological literacy, or as an essen tial outcome of a liberal education in a democratic society. Building upon this latter idea, we argue that we need to renew psychology education, using this con cept of the psychologically literate citizen. The time is ripe (and perhaps overdue) for the psychologically literate citizen, as indicated by U.S. President Barack Obama’s commencement address at Arizona State University in May 2009: . . . we’ll need a fundamental change of perspective and attitude. It’s clear that we need to build a new foundation—a stronger foundation—for our econ omy and our prosperity, rethinking how we grow our economy, how we use energy, how we educate our children, how we care for our sick, how we treat our environment . . . I’m talking about an approach to life—a quality of mind and quality of heart; a willingness to follow your passions, regardless of whether they lead to fortune and fame; a willingness to question conven tional wisdom and rethink old dogmas; a lack of regard for all the traditional


11

markers of status and prestige—and a commitment instead to doing what’s meaningful to you, what helps others, what makes a difference in this world . . . Acts of sacrifice and decency without regard to what’s in it for you—that also creates ripple effects—ones that lift up families and communities; that spread opportunity and boost our economy; that reach folks in the forgotten corners of the world.

Acknowledgments We would like to thank Fiona McDonald and Jun Mo Jeong for assistance with this chapter. Jacky would like to thank Gail Huon for suggesting that we “unpack” the notion of “literacy”. Jacky Cranney’s work on this chapter was supported by funding from the Australian Learning and Teaching Council, an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Work place Relations. The views expressed in this chapter do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd.

References American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, D. C.: Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/ about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf. Beins, B. (2007, Spring). Psychology, critical thinking, and scientific literacy. Psychology Teacher Network, 17, 3–4. Belar, C. (2008, November). Increasing psychological literacy. Monitor on Psychology, 39(10), 56. Cranney, J., Kofod, M., Huon, G., Jensen, L., Levin, K., McAlpine, I., Scoufis, M., & Whitaker, N. (2005). Portfolio tools: Learning and teaching strategies to facilitate development of graduate attributes. Proceedings of the Blended Learning in Science Teaching and Learning Symposium, September 30, 2005, University of Sydney. Sydney: UniServe Science. Cranney, J., Provost, S., Katsikitis, M., Martin, F., White, F., & Cohen, L. (2008). Designing a diverse, future-oriented vision for undergraduate psychology in Australia. Strawberry Hills, New South Wales, AU: Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd. Dahlsgaard, K., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Shared virtue: the convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Review of General Psychology, 9, 203–213. Dunn, D. S., & McCarthy, M. A. (2010). The capstone course in psychology as liberal education opportunity. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill, IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 155–170). New York: Oxford University Press. Ewing, A. T., Andre, J., Blair-Broeker, C. T., Fineburg, A. C., Daniel, J. H., Higa, J. J., et al. (2010). Where and when people learn psychological science: The sun never sets. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 81–94). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.

12


Franklin Pierce University (no date). Global citizenship certificate. Retrieved Sept. 6, 2009, from http://www.youshouldvisit.us/academics/ugrad/programs_of_study/ humanÂ�ities/global_citizenship/index.htm. Halpern, D. F. (Ed.). (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Holmes, J. D., & Beins, B. C. (2009). Psychology is a science: at least some students think so. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 5–11. Kintgen, E. R. (1988). Literacy literacy. Visible Language, 1, 149–168. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: an overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 212–260. Retrived from http://www.unco.edu/cetl/sir/stating_outcome/ documents/Krathwohl.pdf. Landrum, R. E., Hettich, P. I., & Wilner, A. (2010). Alumni perceptions of workforce readiness. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 97–106. Lunt, I., Bartram, D., Döpping, J., Georgas, J., Jern, S., Job, R., Lecuyer, R., Newstead, S., Nieminen, P., Odland, S., Peiró, J. M., Poortinga, Y., Roe, R., Wilpert, B., & Herman, E. (2001). EuroPsyT: a framework for education and training for psychologists in Europe. Report by Project EuroPsyT, funded by the Leonardo da Vinci programme. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from www.europsych.org. Marsella, A. J. (2007). Education and training for a global psychology: foundations, issues, and actions. In M. J. Stevens & U. P. Gielen (Eds.), Toward a global psychology: research, intervention, and pedagogy (pp. 333–361). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Marshall, S. (2010). The University of New South Wales Academic Graduate Attributes Framework. Academic Board Document (Aug. 3, 2010). McGovern, T. V. (Ed.). (1993). Handbook for enhancing undergraduate education in psychology. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 9–28). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McGovern, T. V., Furumoto, L., Halpern, D. F., Kimble, G. A., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). Liberal education, study in depth, and the arts and science major—psychology. American Psychologist, 46, 598–605. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: a handbook and classification. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Scullard, H. H. (1982). From the Gracchi to Nero: a history of Rome from 133 BC to AD 68 (5th ed.). London: Routledge. Thieman, T. J., Clary, E. G., Olson, A. M., Dauner, R. C., & Ring, E. E. (2009). Introducing students to psychological research: general psychology as a laboratory course. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 160–168. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2004). The plurality of literacy and its implications for policies and programmes (p. 13). Paris, France: UNESCO. Victoria International Development Education Association (no date). What is a global citizen? Retrieved Sept. 6, 2009, from http://www.videa.ca/global/citizen.html.

PART TWO

Curriculum Perspectives


2 Curriculum Matters Structure, Content, and Psychological Literacy Dana S. Dunn, Robin L. Cautin, and Regan A. R. Gurung

We often teach like everyone is going to graduate school, but graduate school is [for] the minority. Diane F. Halpern (quoted in Goldstein, 2010, p. 23)

P

sychology differs from many other disciplines in that students can readily connect what they learn in their coursework to their own lives (Goldstein, 2010). This distinction is at the root of the idea of psychological literacy as defined by McGovern and colleagues (2010). Promoting psychological literacy entails reorienting what and how we teach students in a way that emphasizes psychology’s relevance. To the extent that the acquisition of core psychological knowledge takes place in the classroom, the obvious channel for cultivating psychological literacy is the undergraduate psychology curriculum. In this chapter, we begin by reviewing the history of psychology curricula in the United States and then consider how learning outcomes related to psychological literacy might shape disciplinary curricula for undergraduates. Such curricular change must address the necessary balance between graduate and undergraduate needs, and the balance between cutting-edge and core knowledge; for this reason, we specifically discuss the range of learning outcomes a psychologically literate curriculum should comprise. We then turn to the competencies that should appear in psychologically literate curricula and address ways to give courses a more global perspective. The next section of the chapter focuses on practical ways to make a departmental curriculum more psychologically literate and offers advice on assessing literacy. We conclude with a call to develop a psychologically literate citizenry.

16

T h e P s y c h o l o gi c a l ly Lit e r at e Citi z e n

A Brief History of Psychology Curricula Curricula Then Informal wrangling notwithstanding, virtually no systematic study of the undergraduate psychology curriculum in the United States happened prior to the 1950s. The earliest concerted efforts, which took place in the 1950s and 1960s respectively, involved two small, self-selected groups of participants (Buxton et al., 1952; McKeachie & Milholland, 1961), each of whom endorsed the notion of psychology as a liberal arts discipline, and who specified preferred curriculum structures. In the 1970s, based on a national survey of schools that did and did not offer a psychology major, a qualitative study of the undergraduate psychology curriculum was advanced (Kulik et al., 1973). It detailed the growing diversity of undergraduate education in psychology and deliberately refrained from stipulating preferred curriculum structures, a decision that reflected a divergence from previous efforts. Throughout the 1980s there was growing demand for curricular guidelines for undergraduate psychology students, and a concomitant call for ongoing assessment of many facets of undergraduate psychology, including the curriculum (McGovern, Furumoto, Halpern, Kimble, & McKeachie, 1991; Scheier & Rogers, 1985). In the mid-1980s, the American Psychological Association’s (APA’s) Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) resolved to clarify the function of the undergraduate psychology major in relation to traditional liberal arts education, as well as to detail curricular guidelines. This work inspired the APA’s National Conference on Enhancing the Quality of Undergraduate Education in Psychology, which convened at St. Mary’s College of Maryland in 1991 (see McGovern, 1993). The curriculum report of the St. Mary’s Conference (Brewer et al., 1993) reaffirmed the conception of psychology as a liberal arts discipline, stating that the general goal of an undergraduate education in psychology is to “teach students to think as scientists about behavior and experience” (Brewer et al., 1993, p. 169). Intended to elucidate the common features of all undergraduate psychology programs, the curricular framework for the psychology major described in the Brewer report was not prescriptive in nature. It did, however, recognize four distinct groups of courses, ideally to be taken in the following sequence: the introductory course, methodology courses, content courses, and integrative experiences. A recent comparison of psychology major programs around the nation to programs described 10 years earlier showed some progress had been made in aligning with the Brewer report, although many suggestions (e.g., capstone courses) were still not common (Stoloff et al., 2010).

A Core Curriculum for Now The most recent curricular review (Dunn et al., 2010) was part of the APA’s National Conference on Undergraduate Education in Psychology, which convened at the University of Puget Sound in 2008 (see Halpern, 2010) and sought to address key issues in undergraduate psychology education in light of recent

Curriculum Matters

17

changes and developments both within and outside the discipline of psychology. The curricular report that emerged from the Puget Sound Conference reaffirmed psychology’s place in the liberal arts tradition. Arguing that the increased fragmentation of the field, technological advances, and the rise of a consumerist culture have threatened the traditional identity of psychology, Dunn and colleagues (2010) advocated a core curriculum that not only emphasized scientific methodology, but also ensured breadth and depth in substantive content areas of the field: Biological Bases, Learning/Cognition, Developmental, and Sociocultural (see also APA, 2007; Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, Halonen, & Hill, 2007). This recommendation was intended to provide greater coherence to the undergraduate psychology curriculum in the United States, which could then be attuned to the specific needs and resources of various programs.

Psychological Literacy, Student Learning Outcomes, and the Psychology Curriculum How can a curriculum be tuned to promote psychological literacy? First, we believe that psychology departments should review their current curricula in light of the core curriculum recommended by Dunn and colleagues (2010), and make adjustments as necessary. Psychology departments should also familiarize themselves with the APA Guidelines for the Undergraduate Psychology Major (APA, 2007), the recommendations of which outline the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values that derive from the undergraduate psychology major and its place in the context of a liberal education. Table 2.1 categorizes two sets of five learning goals, the first more specific to the science and application of psychology, the second more related to the broader goals of a liberal arts education as addressed by psychology (APA, 2007). McGovern and colleagues (2010) note that the APA guidelines are consistent with their definition of psychological literacy and with student learning outcomes (SLOs) created independently by academic psychologists in Australia and Europe. SLOs are concrete statements that indicate what students will know or be able to demonstrate once they have completed an activity, a course, or a major (Angelo & Cross, 1993; Diamond, 2008; Suskie, 2009). For SLOs to be meaningful, departments must also identify useful measures for assessing SLOs. We identify selected learning outcomes consistent with psychological literacy (McGovern et al., 2010) and the core curriculum recommendations made by Dunn and colleagues (2010). What follows is a description of each SLO, along with how each can be achieved via the psychology curriculum.

Writing It is important for students to have the ability to write effectively for a variety of audiences and purposes. An essential skill for psychology students is to be able to employ the discipline’s vernacular and writing style (e.g., APA, 2010; Beins, Smith,

18


Table 2.1â•‡ Learning Goals Advocated in the APA Guidelines for the Undergraduate Psychology Major

Consistent with the Science and Application of Psychology Goal 1: Knowledge Base of Psychology Goal 2: Research Methods in Psychology Goal 3: Critical Thinking Skills in Psychology Goal 4: Application of Psychology Goal 5: Values in Psychology

Consistent with Liberal Arts Education Further Developed in Psychology Goal 6: Information and Technological Literacy Goal 7: Communication Skills Goal 8: Sociocultural and International Awareness Goal 9: Personal Development Goal 10: Career Planning and Development Source: Adapted from APA (2007).

& Dunn, 2010). Thus, the undergraduate psychology curriculum should provide students opportunities to produce discipline-based writing samples, such as empirical laboratory reports or critical literature reviews. Equally important as writing professional discipline-based papers, which require the use of APA style, is the ability to write clear and effective prose in general. Such writing may include composing professional letters, e-mail messages, book reviews, or project proposals, and may be intended for psychologists and non-psychologists alike. Accordingly, we recommend that psychology instructors require students to write in a variety of forms, including reflective or persuasive essays, book reviews, and blogs, in addition to the more traditional discipline-based papers. With respect to writing, the goal of psychological literacy is to be able to write clearly and concisely about psychology for professional and lay audiences alike.

Speaking In addition to being proficient in written communication, psychologically liteÂ� rate students should be able to deliver formal and informal oral presentations to both professional and lay audiences. Such presentations may include delivering a lecture-style talk, engaging in a relatively casual exchange of ideas and reactions, or leading a group discussion, all of which may involve groups of people of varying sizes. An undergraduate psychology curriculum that promotes psychological literacy should offer students speaking opportunities that evolve in length and

Curriculum Matters

19

complexity as students move through their programs of study. For example, oral presentations in introductory psychology courses should be straightforward and of relatively short duration. In contrast, capstone experiences that involve an extensive written project should entail opportunities for significant and relatively formal oral presentation about the students’ work.

Research The use of scientific methodology is a defining feature of psychological science, the objective of which is to understand and predict human behavior. As such, it is imperative that psychology majors not only understand how the discipline’s methodologies distinguish it from other disciplines that use different methods, such as hermeneutics (Donald, 2002), but also that students appreciate what constitutes good science. Students need to develop the scientific acumen to separate the wheat from the chaff when evaluating the evidence for psychological claims. This is truer now than ever, as the public is continuously bombarded with research findings from multiple media sources. To promote psychological literacy, the curriculum should include statistics and a research methods course that exposes students to the variety of research approaches used in psychological research, ranging from highly controlled experimental approaches to field-based naturalistic observation. It is particularly desirable that such courses include laboratories in which students gain more practical experience with the material. Ideally, students would be able to conduct an entire research study, engaging in all the stages of the research process. Research methodology in psychology should be emphasized throughout the curriculum. Indeed, hands-on research experience in general allows students the opportunity to integrate the content they learn with the practice of corresponding skills.

Collaboration The nature of psychologists’ work is often collaborative. In hospitals and clinics, professional psychologists commonly work in interdisciplinary teams, while academic psychologists routinely engage in collaborative teaching and participate in research teams. In addition to being able to work independently, psychologically literate students should be capable of working effectively with others. Thus, a curriculum promoting psychological literacy should provide opportunities for students to work alone (perhaps doing library research) and in teams (possibly designing and executing research projects). Where research teams are concerned, faculty members should make it possible for students to rotate serving as team leader (or principal investigator), affording students opportunities to further develop leadership and organizational skills (see, for example, Beins & Wann, 2010). The ability to collaborate is a hallmark of psychological literacy. In learning to work cooperatively with others, students are able to appreciate the various skills

20


and abilities of their peers, develop greater empathy, and learn to constructively resolve conflicts.

Information and Technological Literacy Students should be able to make use of modern information technologies, an established and ubiquitous feature of academia, and life in general. Accordingly, psychology teachers and department administrators should make concerted efforts to incorporate current and emerging technologies into classes within the psychology curriculum and the program’s wider milieu (e.g., Dunn, Wilson, Freeman, & Stowell, 2011). Psychologically literate students should be adept users of psychology databases (e.g., PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES) and of those in the social sciences (e.g., JSTOR, Sociological Abstracts, ERIC) more generally. They should be able to use technological tools to collect, analyze, synthesize, and disseminate Â�information. Students should be comfortable learning new technological skills in and outside of classroom settings.

Students Should Be Able to Define and Describe the Concept of Psychological Literacy Students should understand that psychological knowledge is meant to inform daily life as well as intellectual challenges in the classroom. To this end, teachers should connect psychological principles to “personal, social, and organizational issues in work, relationships, and the broader community” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 11), thus demonstrating how course material relates to everyday phenomena. Moreover, instructors should develop learning activities that demand the application of psychological knowledge. The rationale for promoting psychological literacy should be introduced immediately and referenced consistently throughout the undergraduate psychology curriculum. Discussing the concept of psychological literacy should not be restricted to one course. Instead, consideration of topics, learning experiences, and SLOs relevant to psychological literacy should be included at all stages of students’ program of study, albeit in an appropriately sequenced fashion. That is, teaching about psychological literacy should be done in a way that reflects the consideration of students’ developmental progress, cognitive abilities, and level of knowledge (cf., Baker, McCarthy, Halonen, Dunn, & Hill, 2010; Halonen et al., 2003). Thus, introductory students should first be introduced to the topical areas in and basic terminology of the discipline, then should acquire knowledge of research methodology and analysis, as well as the discipline’s writing style (both intermediate), and only then should they undertake a project that involves the synthesis of knowledge and the application of skills acquired over the course of their undergraduate curriculum, a distinctive feature of psychological literacy. Such a project may be required as part of a well-designed capstone course (Dunn & McCarthy, 2010) or independent research,

Curriculum Matters

21

or it may derive from a discipline-based internship. As a practical matter, instructors should also identify specific SLOs on course syllabi, indicating those that are linked to psychological literacy.

Students Should Be Able to Think and Act Ethically when Applying Psychological Knowledge Although virtually all psychology students in a research methods course discuss the APA’s (2002) ethical principles and code of conduct, discussions of ethical matters should not be limited to this context. Indeed, ethical principled behavior—a hallmark of the psychologically literate student (and citizen)—should be promoted across the curriculum, and should also bear relevance to students’ personal and professional lives.

Students Should Be Able to Demonstrate an Understanding of and Respect for Diversity Psychologically literate individuals understand that diversity—how people differ from one another—is multifaceted: gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, disability, race, religion, culture, social class, age, inter alia, are categories within which people vary. The breadth of diversity should be recognized and incorporated into the entire psychology curriculum (Gurung & Prieto, 2009). The ultimate goal is for students not only to understand and respect individuals from different groups within or beyond their culture, but also to interact with them in cordial and open ways. One means by which to teach students about diversity is to expose them to global issues regarding psychology. In this way, the notion of internationalizing the undergraduate curriculum (e.g., Lutsky et al., 2005) can be realized. Students should learn about the psychological science being conducted around the world and not only that produced in the United States and other Western nations. Cultural perspectives and folkways, for example, can inform research and practice, and psychologically literate persons—as global citizens—should be both sensitive to and interested in variations among nations. Minimally, instructors should look for ways to include theories, methodologies, and research findings from different nations in the undergraduate psychology curriculum. Study abroad experiences, too, should be encouraged, especially those that might have an experiential component allowing for some application of psychological knowledge.

Importing a Global Perspective Around the world, more and more students are taking psychology classes. For example, during the 1970s there were only four departments of psychology in China, whereas today there are nearly 250 (Kan, 2008, in Halpern, 2010).

22


This trend is reflected in other countries, including the United Kingdom and Yemen (Halpern, 2010). Correspondingly, psychology curricula abroad can inform our own (Sexton & Hogan, 1992). What is nominally called psychology in some countries is quite similar to American psychology. Other countries, in contrast, have developed more indigenous psychologies that differ markedly from their American counterpart. What lessons may be gleaned from the world’s psychology curricula? A systematic and comprehensive survey of psychology curricula around the world is beyond the scope of the chapter, but even a cursory review reveals a noteworthy trend: curricula abroad tend to require more interdisciplinary coursework. In Argentina, for example, students are required to take sociology and anthropology courses as part of their psychology program. Such interdisciplinary requirements are worth considering, particularly given the degree to which psychology influences and is informed by the work of other disciplines (Cacioppo, 2007). For example, given the current biological emphasis in psychology and concomitant rise of neuroscience, perhaps requiring coursework in biology as part of the Â�psychology curriculum may be worthy of consideration. Beyond courses for inclusion in the curriculum, a look abroad provides us with models for how we should look at curriculum. As stated previously, in the United States there have been only a few thorough examinations of the psychology curriculum (e.g., the St. Mary’s and Puget Sound conferences). In contrast, it seems that psychology curricula are evaluated more frequently overseas. For example, after education leaders from 29 European countries met in Bologna in 1999 to create a European Higher Education Area (EHEA), members of participating countries (numbering 47 in 2007) began to meet biennially to “arrive at consensus objectives that will not homogenize national educational systems but provide tools to connect them” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 16). Similar meetings take place in the Asia-Pacific region and in Canada. Such international movements suggest an additional curricular component for psychology. For example, to earn a European Certificate in psychology, students are required to appreciate non-psychological theories, such as sociological, anthropological, and philosophical, underscoring the value of interdisciplinary education. In Australia, undergraduate programs must integrate cross-cultural and indigenous issues, and proÂ�mote increasing indigenous participation at all levels of psychology training (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 18). Each of these examples suggests thought-provoking ways in which American psychology curricula can be modified.

Advice on Promoting Psychological Literacy in Psychology Curricula Beyond evaluating student learning outcomes in the context of the undergraduate psychology curriculum and infusing the curriculum with a more global perspective, how else can psychology curricula promote psychologically literacy? To address this question, we offer concrete advice concerning the following three areas: program mission, planning, and assessment.

Curriculum Matters

23

Reflect on Program Mission and Current Learning Goals Before undertaking any curriculum revision, psychology department members should review their respective mission statement (Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, & Halonen, 2011), verifying that it reflects the department’s long-term goals, including the cultivation of psychological literacy. Departments should also evaluate the extent to which student learning goals in psychology are achieved at their institutions. Mission statements and learning goals should be adjusted as necessary to incorporate psychological literacy into the curricular framework of departments.

Creating and Implementing a Plan Curricular reviews often occur as part of a larger evaluative process, such as an external review or self-study, or in the context of personnel changes, such as new hires. We encourage readers to avail themselves of the myriad sources withÂ�in the discipline that champion the importance of fostering psychological literacy and provide practical, relevant information regarding the planning and implementation of curricular reviews (e.g., Dunn et al., 2007; Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, & Halonen, 2011; Halpern, 2010; Pusateri, Poe, Addison, & Goedel, 2004).

Ongoing Assessment Following curricular change, routine assessment of SLOs should occur to ensure that student learning goals related to psychological literacy are being achieved. Curricular adjustments (and follow-up assessment) can be implemented accordingly. As the curriculum matures, individual course assessments can be scheduled on a rotating basis (e.g., every 2 or 3 years) rather than each semester. Given that the concept of psychological literacy has important implications for students well beyond their undergraduate years, postgraduate surveys of alumni seem worthwhile. Such surveys can query graduates about the extent to which their psychological knowledge informs and contributes to their current professional and private lives.

Educating a Literate Citizenry Beyond the formal undergraduate curriculum (see Dunn et al., 2010), we hope that all students—including those who do not pursue careers or education related to the discipline—will retain a lifelong interest in psychology and an appreciation of its relevance to everyday life. A curriculum designed to promote psychological literacy should equip students with the intellectual tools necessary to becoming “socially responsible problem solvers” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 20). Such a curriculum can foster the development of individuals ready to combat societal ills

24


and work for the betterment of daily life for men and women across the socioeconomic and cultural spectrum. Indeed, the ultimate goal of a curriculum designed to promote psychological literacy is the cultivation of a psychologically literate citizenry.

References American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073. American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Retrieved April 11, 2010, from http://www.apa.org/ed/psymajor_ guideline.pdf. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, D. C.: Author. Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: a handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Baker, S. C., McCarthy, M. A., Halonen, J. S., Dunn, D. S., & Hill, G. W., IV. (2010). DevelÂ� oping scientific reasoning skills in beginning and ending students. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill, IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 349–363). New York: Oxford University Press. Beins, B. C., Smith, R. A., & Dunn, D. S. (2010). Writing as a developmental process. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill, IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 253–278). New York: Oxford University Press. Beins, B. C., & Wann, P. D. (2010). Research teams: developing a capstone experience with programmatic research. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill, IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major: research, cases, and recommendations (pp. 187–203). New York: Oxford University Press. Brewer, C. L., Hopkins, J. R., Kimble, G. A., Matlin, M. W., McCann, L. I., McNeil, O. V., Nodine, B. F., Quinn, V. N., & Saundra. (1993). Curriculum. In T. V. McGovern (Ed.), Handbook for enhancing undergraduate education in psychology (pp. 161–182). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Buxton, C. E., Cofer, C. N., Gustad, J. W., MacLeod, R. B., McKeachie, W. J., & Wolfle, D. (1952). Improving undergraduate instruction in psychology. New York: Macmillan. Cacioppo, J. (2007, September). Psychology is a hub science. APS Observer, 20(5), 42. Diamond, R. M. (2008). Designing and assessing courses and curricula: a practical guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Donald, J. G. (2002). Learning to think: disciplinary perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Dunn, D. S., & McCarthy, M. A. (2010). The capstone course in psychology as liberal education opportunity. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill, IV (Eds.),

Curriculum Matters

25

Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 155–170). New York: Oxford University Press. Dunn, D. S., McCarthy, M., Baker, S., Halonen, J. S., & Hill, G. W., IV. (2007). Quality benchmarks in undergraduate psychology programs. American Psychologist, 62, 650–670. Dunn, D. S., McCarthy, M. A., Baker, S. & Halonen, J. S. (2011). Using quality benchmarks for assessing and developing undergraduate programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dunn, D. S., Wilson, J. C., Freeman, J., & Stowell, J. R. (Eds.). (2011). Getting connected: best practices for technology-enhanced teaching and learning in psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. Goldstein, R. (2010). Major developments in undergraduate education. Observer, 23(3), 23–26. Gurung, R. A. R., & Prieto, L. (Eds.) (2009). Getting culture: incorporating diversity across the curriculum. Arlington, VA: Stylus. Halonen, J. S., Bosack, T., Clay, S., & McCarthy, M. (with Dunn, D. S., Hill IV, G. W., McEntarfer, R., Mehrotra, C., Nesmith, R., Weaver, K., & Whitlock, K.) (2003). A rubric for authentically learning, teaching, and assessing scientific reasoning in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 196–208. Halpern, D. F. (Ed.). (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Kulik, J. A., Brown, D. R., Vestewig, R. E., & Wright, J. (1973). Undergraduate education in psychology. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Lutsky, N., Torney-Purta, J., Velayo, R., Whittlesey, V., Woolf, L., & McCarthy, M. (2005). American Psychological Association working group on internationalizing the undergraduate psychology curriculum: Report and recommended learning outcomes for internationalizing the undergraduate curriculum. Retrieved April 13, 2010, from http:// www.apa.org/international/governance/cirp/s08-agenda-20-exhibit-1.pdf. McGovern, T. V. (Ed.). (1993). Handbook for enhancing undergraduate education in psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E., Jr., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McGovern, T. V., Furumoto, L., Halpern, D. F., Kimble, G. A., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). Liberal education, study in depth, and the arts and science major—psychology. American Psychologist, 46, 598–605. McKeachie, W. J., & Milholland, J. E. (1961). Undergraduate curricula in psychology. Chicago: Scott, Foresman. Pusateri, T. P., Poe, R. E., Addison, W. E., & Goedel, G. D. (2004). Designing and implementing psychology program reviews. In D. S. Dunn, C. M. Mehrotra, & J. S. Halonen (Eds.), Measuring up: educational assessment challenges and practices for psychology (pp. 65–89). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Scheirer, C. J., & Rogers, A. M. (1985). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: 1984. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Sexton, V. S., & Hogan, J. D. (1992). International psychology: views from around the world. Omaha, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

26


Stoloff, M., McCarthy, M., Keller, L., Varfolomeeva, V., Lynch, J., Makara, K., et al. (2010). The undergraduate psychology major: an examination of structure and sequence. Teaching of Psychology, 37(1), 4–15. doi:10.1080/00986280903426274. Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing student learning: a common sense guide (2nd ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

3 Critical Thinking and the Education of Psychologically Literate Citizens D i a n e F. H a l p e r n a n d H e a t h e r A . B u t l e r

A

s we began working on this chapter, a student stopped by to discuss his plans for the future. He was two courses away from graduating with a bachelor’s degree in psychology at a prestigious liberal arts college in the United States. In the course of our conversation he explained that he had no interest in counseling, teaching, or research, so we asked him what did interest him about psychology. He said he had a theory, which does not merit repeating here, about the singular etiology of all mental illness. After discussing the flaws of his theory with him, it became clear that he had never taken a class on the subject, nor had he done much independent reading on the topic of mental illness, but he was still eager to share his insights despite the fact that he had no knowledge of the topic. In fact, he did not recognize the need for knowledge: he was content discussing his (uninformed) opinion with us. This hapless student did not understand the definition or importance of a theory. He went on to explain that he believed in palmistry (palm-reading) and asked our opinion of it. At that point in the conversation we exchanged disappointed, knowing glances. How could a senior psychology major at a highly selective college exhibit such poor critical thinking and psychological literacy? Fortunately, we have considerable data showing that he is exceptional in his illiteracy, but having this student appear, as though on cue, as we began this chapter, made us even more committed to make a convincing case for providing an effective education in thinking like a psychological scientist. As educators we must be resolute in training our students to think critically, make informed decisions, and become educated consumers.

The Need for Psychological Literacy We live in a world that becomes more complex and technical with each passing day. Average users in the United States spend 12 hours a week on the internet (Kerr, 2009), and few of today’s young adults can imagine a time when information was not literally at their fingertips. Students today need to be savvy navigators of the

28

T h e P s y c h o l o g i c a l ly Lit e r at e Citi z e n

information superhighway and to think carefully about the massive quantities of information they consume. There are undeniable benefits to the new ways of obtaining information that have come with massive Internet use, but there are important caveats that go along with increased access to multiple forms of data. Internet scams have become increasingly sophisticated, hate sites are often disguised as scientific data, and social media networks are being used for cyber-bullying and illegal activities. The tsunami of information that is deluging all of us is of value only if we can discern what is credible, read with comprehension, recognize pseudoscience, and think critically about the myriad of topics that confront us in our everyday personal and professional lives. Access to information from distant countries has made us all potentially, at least, global citizens, even if we have never traveled outside our hometown, and as such we need to be able to see issues from multiple perspectives without losing sight of the fact that all information is not equally good. Many people have questioned whether today’s students, who are tomorrow’s workforce, will be smart enough to meet the demands of the future (Hunt, 1995). The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for 2010–11 reports an increased demand for “knowledge workers” or “symbol analysts.” These terms describe workers who can complete multistep operations, manipulate abstract symbols, understand complex ideas, acquire new accurate information efficiently, and are flexible in their thinking. These new workers must also recognize that change is inevitable, retraining is probable, and continuous learning is necessary to meet the demands of a complex world. As educators in a changing world we must ask ourselves: Are we training our students to meet the demands of the future? Recently, there has been a call for the reform of undergraduate psychology education (Halpern, 2010b). Most of what students are explicitly taught in the classroom is domain-specific, with little thought or effort about using what is learned inside the classroom in out-of-classroom settings. In the jargon of psychology, few faculty members actually teach for transfer, yet it is transfer that is the reason for a formal education. College faculty assess learning with various methods (mostly tests) in each class, but the real test of what is learned occurs outside the university campus, at some time in the future, and at a place that is not very similar to a college classroom. Will the students who sit in our classrooms today be able to use their knowledge of child development when they make decisions about their own children or when they vote on measures that pertain to education? Will they use what they learn in cognitive development to improve their memory or make better decisions? Can they recognize error variance and statistical principles when they are confronted with issues in the workplace where these principles are relevant? Sadly, for most students, a majority of this domain-specific information will not be applied outside of the classroom unless it is specifically relevant to their lives and unless they recognize the links between what happens in class and life outside of class. The main job of college faculty is to teach in ways that make transfer across time, space, setting, and academic disciplines more likely. We want graduates who can and will use the skills and content they learn in school when they are making decisions about their family life, in their workplace, and in the exercise of responsible citizenship.

Critical Thinking and the Education of Psychologically Literate Citizens

29

Most psychology majors choose psychology because they believe that the skills they learn as psychology majors can be applied to a variety of careers in business, healthcare, government, and education. Unfortunately, there is a mismatch between students’ expectations and how faculty members prepare their courses. In the United States, most undergraduate psychology courses are designed to prepare graduates for advanced graduate-school training, even if that is not the stated objective: how else could we justify some of the more abstruse concepts that we include in our classes—ones with little relevance in any setting outside of academia? But the overwhelming majority of psychology majors will never attend graduate school. What do they need to know and be able to do in their future lives as they develop careers in commerce, the law, teaching, medicine, finance, and the multitude of other professions they are likely to enter? Based on these contemporary demands, psychological literacy has been identified as a universal goal of an education in psychology.

Conceptual Underpinnings of Psychological Literacy Virtually everyone will agree that educated citizens need to know how to use quantitative information and read with a high level of comprehension. We use the term “literacy” for these ways of understanding mathematical and verbal information. McGovern and colleagues (2010) extended the list of basic literacies to include both knowledge about psychological concepts and the willingness and ability to think like a psychological scientist. At the heart of psychological literacy is an answer about what we want our students to know and be able to do when they graduate from college. It is a body of knowledge, skills, and disposition that all college graduates should possess. Essential knowledge about human thought and behavior is necessary for all educated adults, but we would expect a higher level of psychological literacy from students who graduate with a degree in psychology. According to McGovern and colleagues (2010), psychological literacy is: • Having a well-defined vocabulary and basic knowledge of the critical subject matter of psychology • Valuing the intellectual challenges required to use scientific thinking and the disciplined analysis of information to evaluate alternative courses of actions • Taking a creative and amiable-skeptic approach to problem solving • Applying psychological principles to personal, social, and organizational issues in work, relationships, and the broader community • Acting ethically • Being competent in using and evaluating information and technology • Communicating effectively in different modes and with many different audiences • Recognizing, understanding, and fostering respect for diversity • Being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behavior and mental processes.

30


McGovern and colleagues (2010) provide numerous examples of psychological literacy in action. For example, when evaluating the effect of a community housing unit for adults with mental disabilities, the psychologically literate citizen will respond to the “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) responses of neighbors who are concerned that crime rates will increase and property values will decline. The response to these and other psychology-related concerns is to look for relevant research. What actually happened when homes for mentally disabled adults were opened in other neighborhoods? Are the neighbors’ fears justified based on what we know from the research literature? The psychologically literate adult will look for information that would inform the decision and will effectively communicate research findings, so that those who live in any neighborhood where group homes for psychologically disabled adults are being planned can respond in a reasoned manner that is based on relevant information instead of responding based on fear and ignorance. In addition, the psychologically literate adult will call upon knowledge about mental disabilities that he or she learned in college classes. Thus, psychological literacy is both a disposition to seek and interpret relevant information and a conscious effort to recall and use knowledge about psychologically related topics.

Critical Thinking and Psychological Literacy Are Overlapping Constructs Readers with a solid background in the literature on critical thinking will recognize that there is considerable overlap between psychological literacy and critical thinking (Fig. 3.1). This conceptual overlap is not surprising given that both constructs are firmly rooted in the methods and content of psychology. Critical thinking has been described in a variety of different ways, but researchers generally agree that it involves an attempt to achieve a desired outcome by thinking rationally in a goaloriented fashion and reasoning in an open-ended manner (e.g., Ennis, 1993; Halpern, 2003; Moseley et al., 2005; Sternberg, Roediger, & Halpern, 2007). Halpern (1998, 2003) defines critical thinking as: the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. It is used to describe thinking that is purposeful, reasoned, and goal directed—the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions, when the thinker is using skills that are thoughtful and effective for the particular context and type of thinking task. (p. 6) We think of psychological literacy as consisting of two parts: (a) content knowledge, consisting of knowledge about psychological research and basic constructs, and (b) critical thinking, or thinking like a psychological scientist. The content portion of psychological literacy consists of essential knowledge about the brain bases of thinking, learning, and emotion; how people learn and remember; the way social


31

Content

Scientific Reasoning

Critical Thinking Skills

Dispositions

Figure 3.1â•‡ Psychological literacy consists of the content matter in psychology, critical thinking skills and disposition, and scientific reasoning, which in a subset of all three components.

situations affect behavior; how people develop emotionally and cognitively; and basic concepts regarding mental disorders and their treatment—in short, essential knowledge that can be found in most good introductory psychology textbooks. For psychologically literate citizens, this essential knowledge is not inert—it is frequently retrieved and modified by interacting with others at work, at home, and in other settings. The critical thinking portion of psychological literacy refers to the use of critical thinking skills across a wide range of contexts and the willingness to do the hard work of thinking. Unfortunately, critical thinking is sometimes confused with negative thinking because the word “critical” is often used to connate negative values. For example, you might describe a colleague’s feedback on a manuscript as being too critical, which is intended to mean that the colleague’s feedback was too negative. However, the “critical” in “critical thinking” refers to careful evaluation that elaborates on both the positive and negative aspects of a problem or argument. Whereas critical thinking is good thinking, non-critical thinking is poor thinking. Non-critical thinkers would not dismiss palmistry, or would believe in palmistry, without giving their belief much conscious thought, or would decide about the desirability of having a home for mentally disabled adults in their neighborhood based on some “gut” feeling or intuition without considering the information that is relevant to decisions about where to house mentally disabled adults. Critical thinkers entertain the validity of palmistry or any other topic by investigating the evidence. They might read research articles testing the ability to know something about someone’s future by “reading” the palms of his or her hands to determine whether it was a reliable phenomenon, and they would seek credible theories that relate the lines in one’s hands to life outcomes such as longevity and love. (In case you are

32


curious, there is no empirical evidence suggesting that palmistry is valid or reliable). We think of critical thinkers as amiable skeptics, not cynics. They examine the evidence before arriving at their conclusion and remain open to different types of evidence, even when the evidence runs counter to an existing belief or preferred outcome. Critical thinking is both a disposition and a learned skill (Halpern, 2003). Critical thinkers have developed an attitude or disposition toward approaching problems. They are motivated thinkers who effortfully (deliberately) process information. Critical thinkers spend more time preparing and planning than do non-critical thinkers. They are more flexible and open-minded. Critical thinkers are persistent and exert mental energy working on difficult problems. Critical thinkers are willing to admit when they are wrong and will change their mind if the evidence changes. Unlike poor thinkers, who may operate on autopilot much of the time, critical thinkers are willfully engaged in the task at hand. Although critical thinking is a disposition, it also can be a learned behavior. There is a substantial body of empirical evidence that indicates critical thinking skills can be learned and can transfer to other domains. A review of this literature is beyond the scope of this chapter (for reviews, see Chance, 1986; Halpern, 2003; Moseley et al., 2005; Nisbett, 1992), but we will elaborate on a few tests of this hypothesis. Researchers have used a variety of methods to assess whether critical thinking skills can be effectively taught and whether critical thinking skills can transfer to other domains. Some of these methods include self-reported critical thinking abilities (Walsh, Seldomridge, & Badros, 2007), randomized controlled experiments that used control groups and blind-raters to rate the quality of oral arguments and essays (Herrnstein, Nickerson, de Sanchez, & Swets, 1986), standardized Piagetian cognitive development tasks (Fox, Marsh, & Crandall, 1983; McKinnon & Renner, 1971), argument mapping (Davies, 2008), coding discussions and blog entries for examples of critical thinking and examples of poor thinking (Wang, Woo, & Zhao, 2009), requiring students to justify and explain their ideas (Barak, 2009), multiple-choice tests of critical thinking skills (Lehman, Lempert, & Nisbett, 1988), and real-world argument analysis (Fong, Krantz, & Nisbett, 1986). Nisbett and his colleagues conducted a series of interesting experiments that provide the strongest support for the idea that critical thinking skills can be learned. In one such experiment, Fong, Krantz, and Nisbett (1986) contacted students who had previously received instruction involving statistical thinking skills (e.g., the law of large numbers) under the façade of a phone survey. The students spontaneously used their critical thinking skills while completing the phone survey. The students identified the appropriate skill for the problems and used that skill. Additionally, the knowledge that the students learned transferred from academia to a real-world situation (i.e., the phone interview) months after the students were finished with the course. These findings suggest that critical thinking skills can be taught and can transfer to other domains. Psychology is not the only discipline to have aspirational goals for its majors. In the United States, nursing, for example, has adopted a list of necessary


33

competencies for its graduates, and critical thinking is an explicit learning goal for future nurses (Giddens & Gloeckner, 2005). The impetus for learning outcomes in nursing and other medical fields has come, in large part, from concern over patient safety (Proctor, Compton, Grossman, & Fanjiang, 2005). Clinical judgment in nursing is often assessed with a series of videotaped vignettes that depict common problems that can occur in a wide variety of situations, such as a change in the mental status of a patient or the effect of anxiety on clinical symptoms (Performance Management Systems, 2006). Not surprisingly, an increased emphasis on critical thinking has also dominated much of the literature on medical education. Wilson (2010) described the trend toward evidence-based medicine in much the same way as colleagues in other disciplines are discussing evidence-based education and evidence-based practices in clinical psychology. He described evidence-based practice as “a new paradigm in how information is to be used and prioritized in caring for patients” (p. 398). Although Wilson criticizes the unthinking use of evidence-based approaches, the advantages of developing the habit of looking for and using relevant research seem evident. This approach is similar to the idea of psychological literacy, which can be thought of as evidence-based psychology. A major difference is that psychological literacy is a desirable, perhaps even necessary, outcome for all educated adults because everyone needs basic knowledge about child development, mental disorders, thinking and learning, and the other core topics in psychology. The skills in understanding and applying empirically validated research should be enhanced in psychology majors relative to students who major in other disciplines, but it is a necessary educational outcome for all educated adults. In addition to content knowledge, psychological literacy includes the skills of critical thinking and the willingness to employ those skills across a variety of contexts. There are a variety of known clearly identifiable critical thinking skills; idenÂ� tifying which skill is the appropriate skill for a particular problem is one of the greatest challenges of becoming a critical thinker. The Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (Halpern, 2010a) categorizes these skills into five categories: (a) verbal reasoning skills, (b) argument analysis skills, (c) skills in thinking as hypothesis testing, (d) using likelihood and uncertainty, and (e) decision-making and problem-solving skills. Together, these five categories define an organizational rubric for a skills approach to critical thinking. They have face validity and can be easily communicated to the general public, and they offer one possible answer to the question of what students need to know and be able to do when they enter the workforce or what employees need to know and be able to do to advance to a stage in their career that requires higher-order thinking skills. The Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment consists of 25 everyday scenarios, each of which is briefly described and presented using common language. For each scenario, respondents are first asked an open-ended (i.e., constructed response) question, which is followed by a forced-choice question (e.g., multiple choice, ranking, or rating of alternatives), such as select the best alternative, rate each of the alternatives in terms of their relevance, or indicate which two of the following alternatives would

34


be a good response. Cognitive psychologists differentiate between free recall and recognition processes in memory, and these two types of questions are designed to take advantage of the different cognitive processes. The total score is (approximately) equally weighted between constructed response and forced-choice questions. The Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment is being used in multiple languages and in multiple countries around the world (Ku, 2009). Critical thinking skills cross disciplinary boundaries, and as such, they are an essential component of psychological literacy. Halpern (1998, 2003) previously proposed a four-part model for teaching critical thinking skills for effective transfer to other domains. The model involves (a) explicitly learning critical thinking skills, (b) developing a disposition or attitude toward effortful thinking and learning, (c) directing learning activities in ways that increase the probability of transcontextual transfer (structure training), and (d) making metacognitive monitoring explicit and overt. This model should also be appropriate for the training of psychological literacy. The first step in the four-part model of learning to think critically is to explicitly learn the critical thinking skills. The following is a list of skills we should be teaching our students in order to strengthen their critical thinking skills and their psychological literacy: • Recognize semantic slanting and guilt by association. • Seek out contradictory evidence. • Use metacognitive knowledge that allows novices to monitor their own performance and decide when additional help is needed. • Make risk/benefit assessments. • Generate a reasoned method for selecting among several possible courses of actions. • Give reasons for choices as well as varying the style and amount of detail in explanations depending on who is receiving the information. • Recall relevant information when it is needed. • Use skills for learning new techniques efficiently and relating new knowledge to information that was previously learned. • Use numerical information, including the ability to think probabilistically and express thoughts numerically. • Understand basic research principles. • Demonstrate an advanced ability to read and write complex prose. • Present a coherent and persuasive argument on a controversial, contemporary topic. • Provide complex instruction in language that is appropriate for the audience. • Use matrices and other diagrams for communication. • Synthesize information from a variety of sources. • Determine credibility and use this information in formulating and communicating decisions.


35

Dispositions for Critical Thinking The second part of the critical thinking model is the development of the dispositional or attitudinal aspect of thinking and learning. This is one area where there is considerable overlap between critical thinking and psychological literacy. Students must be encouraged to value thinking critically because many of the logical errors that people make occur not because they do not have the ability to think critically, but because they simply fail to do so. Poor thinking and the use of heuristic shortcuts is easier than thinking critically, so we must encourage our students to be prepared for action—the work of thinking critically. Students should be encouraged to (a) plan ahead, because critical thinkers often spend more time in preparation, (b) be flexible and avoid dogmatic thinking, (c) be persistent in solving complicated problems, (d) be willing to self-correct, admit errors, and change their mind, and (e) be mindful of what and how they are thinking. This disposition is consistent with the values we encourage in psychologically literate citizens: specifically, the valuing of intellectual challenges required to use scientific thinking and taking an amiable-skeptic approach to problem solving. Both of these principles of psychological literacy relate to dispositions of critical thinkers that educators can encourage. The third part of the model is related to developing teaching methods that allow transfer of critical thinking skills to other domains. Critical thinkers need to recognize the same structural cues present in non-academic and non-psychological domains. For example, one major psychological truism is that you cannot determine causality using correlational methods (“correlation does not mean causation”). While many students may correctly identify this problem inside a classroom or in the domain of psychology, they may fail to transfer that knowledge to the real world. A recent example of this was seen on the popular “news” program that airs daily on U.S. television, The Today Show with Kathie Lee and Hoda. The co-hosts interviewed the writer of a new book about marriage. The author reported data from a large study in the United States, and she asked Kathie Lee and Hoda the following question, “People who listen to which type of music are having the most sex?” and the response options were (a) rock and roll, (b) jazz, (c) hip-hop, or (d) country. After listening to the co-hosts’ responses the author exclaimed, “Jazz lovers have about 30% more sex than the others, so turn on that jazz music!” In this real-world example, the author of the book made a causal statement about an observed correlational relationship (i.e., music choice and amount of sex). Critical thinkers and those who are psychologically literate should be able to identify the problem with this author’s argument even though it was not presented in the context it was taught in. More generally, knowledge transfer can be fostered by requiring students to perform knowledge transfer and by drawing attention to the structural aspects of a problem, so that students can identify similar structural problems in the real world. This is what is meant by applying psychological principles to personal, social, and organizational issues at work, in relationships, and in the broader community, a major tenet of psychological literacy. The following is a list of knowledge transfer exercises that Halpern (2003)

36


has recommended for use in any course where the main objective is transfer of knowledge: • Draw a diagram or other graphic display that organizes the information. • List additional information you would want before answering a question. • Explain why a particular multiple-choice alternative was selected. Which is second best? Why? • State the problem in at least two ways. • Identify which information is most important. Which information is least important? Why? • Categorize the findings in a meaningful way. • List two solutions for problems. • Identify what is wrong with an assertion that was made in the question. • Present two reasons that support the conclusion and two reasons that do not support the conclusion. • Identify the type of persuasive technique being used. • Present two actions you would take to improve the design of a study that was described. The fourth part of the critical thinking model is metacognitive monitoring. Metacognition is an awareness of one’s thought processes or knowing what we do and do not know. Practicing metacognition requires self-reflection, self-awareness, and the ability to self-regulate or manage one’s cognitive abilities (Dean & Kuhn, 2003). Critical thinkers evidence more metacognitive monitoring than non-critical thinkers (Halpern, 2003; Wang, Woo, & Zhao, 2009). There is also empirical evidence suggesting that critical thinking can be improved through metacognitive monitoring (Cohen, Freeman, & Wolf, 1996). Metacognition is involved in selecting which learning strategy to use and determining how resources are allocated. The idea of metacognitive monitoring relates to two principles of psychological literacy: being competent using and evaluating information and technology, and being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behavior and mental processes. Educators can encourage metacognitive monitoring by requiring students to explain their reasoning and any evidence that supports or refutes their position. Having to explain both the supportive and non-supportive evidence is critical to increasing metacognition and identifying biased assumptions.

Scientific Reasoning, Critical Thinking, and Psychological Literacy The constructs of critical thinking and psychological literacy also share considerable overlap with the knowledge and skills required in scientific reasoning. We conceptualize scientific reasoning as a component of both critical thinking and psychological literacy. Scientific reasoning involves understanding the scientific method and using that knowledge as a guide for evaluating research and for


37

designing studies that can answer empirical questions. It is not a set of skills that are required only for scientists; the general public needs to be wise consumers of research and other activities that are sometimes dressed up and labeled as research, even though they do not adhere to the basic principles of scientific inquiry. Research methods and the use of statistical inference are at the heart of the major in psychology, so psychology is a primary major for the development of scientific reasoning skills in college students. Psychologically literate citizens (who could also be called critical thinkers) will know what questions to ask when they are presented with research findings. These findings can come from diverse topics, including the use of plant food to increase plant growth, facilitated communication in which autistic children (supposedly) communicate for the first time when aides guide their hands over keyboards or similar devices, and the likelihood that students will learn more when their teachers receive higher pay. In all of these examples, and countless others, the students we are preparing for the future need to ask good questions about the quality of the evidence that is offered in support of conclusions, seek empirical information, recognize flaws, and make informed decisions based on their knowledge of psychology and their ability to think critically.

Assessing Psychological Literacy We have conceptualized psychological literacy as part critical thinking, which includes the skills and the disposition to think critically, and fluency with the content matter of psychology. But merely calling on higher education to educate students in psychological literacy is hollow unless we provide a means for assessing how well individual students and institutions achieve this goal. This is an ideal time to propose an assessment of psychological literacy because the movement to assess learning outcomes is gaining traction throughout the world. Higher education in Europe is being restructured under the “Bologna Process,” which is transforming education in 47 countries. According to a recent report, 53 percent of the countries involved in this process have developed learning outcomes for all courses, and another 32 percent have developed them for some courses (Sursock & Smidt, 2010). Similar efforts are underway in the countries that make up the African Union and Latin American and Caribbean Higher Education Area (Redden, 2010). In the United States, multiple projects are being conducted in which employers, alumni, current students, and faculty are identifying general and subject-area competencies. It is against this backdrop of assessment activities that we propose a standardized assessment of psychological literacy. An assessment of psychological literacy would include a variety of scenarios, similar to the concern over having a home for disabled adults in one’s neighborhood that was used as an exemplar by McGovern and colleagues (2010). Students could demonstrate their knowledge of psychology and critical thinking skills by responding to a series of questions about each scenario, in much the same way that critical thinking skills are assessed across domains of knowledge with the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (2010). For example, students could be

38


asked to identify additional information they would need to formulate a quality response or explain how they would design a study to answer a research question. Scenarios would reflect the range of topics where knowledge of psychological principles and critical thinking skills are needed for a reasoned response. Some possible examples include an advertisement for a drug that claims to improve memory, a simulation of a jury that is deliberating about the use of eyewitness testimony, an evaluation of a therapy for autism, an editorial claiming that girls and boys are so different that they need separate educational experiences, a blog about a program designed to reduce smoking in adolescents, and so on. The list of psychology-relevant topics is virtually endless. Once standardized, institutions could gauge whether they are making progress in graduating psychologically literate students, and individual students could learn how they fare relative to other students at similar and dissimilar institutions. We urge interested readers to join us in developing this assessment. It will not be easy to educate our students for tasks that are often ambiguous and out of our control and depend on effortful processing. But it is our most important task as college faculty, and with our own hard work and thoughtful effort, we can educate psychologically literate citizens with the dispositions and skills of critical thinkers and the specific knowledge of research methods to be wise consumers of research.

References Barak, M. (2009). Idea focusing versus idea generating: A course for teachers on inventive problem solving. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46, 345–356. DOI: 10.1080/14703290903301743. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2010–2011). Occupational outlook handbook, 2010–2011 edition. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos021.htm. Chance, P. (1986). Thinking in the classroom: a survey of programs. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. Cohen, M. S., Freeman, J. T., & Wolf, S. (1996). Metarecognition in time-stressed decision making: Recognizing, critiquing, and correcting. Human Factors, 38, 206–219. doi: 10.1518/001872096779048020. Davies, W. M. (2008). “Not quite right”: helping students to make better arguments. Teaching in Higher Education, 13, 327–340. DOI: 10.1080/13562510802045352. Dean, D., & Kuhn, D. (2003). Metacognition and critical thinking. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory Into Practice, 32, 179–186. Fong, G. T., Krantz, D. H., & Nisbett, R. E. (1986). The effects of statistical training on thinking about everyday problems. Cognitive Psychologist, 18, 253–292. doi:10.1016/0010–0285(86)90001–0. Fox, L. S., Marsh, G., & Crandall, J. C., Jr. (1983). The effect of college classroom experiences on formal operational thinking. Paper presented at the 1983 Annual Convention of the Western Psychological Association, San Francisco.


39

Giddens, J., & Gloeckner, G. W. (2005). The relationship of critical thinking to performance on the NCLEX-RN. Journal of Nursing Education, 44, 85–89. Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53, 449–455. Halpern, D. F. (2003). Thought and knowledge: an introduction to critical thinking (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Halpern, D. F. (2010a). Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment. SCHUHFRIED (Vienna Test System). www.schuhfried.at. Halpern, D. F. (2010b). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Herrnstein, R. J., Nickerson, R. S., de Sanchez, M., & Swets, J. A. (1986). Teaching thinking skills. American Psychologist, 41, 1279–1289. doi: 10.1037/0003–066X.41.11.1279. Hunt, E. (1995). Will we be smart enough? A cognitive analysis of the coming workforce. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Kerr, D. (2009, June 26). Overall time spent online remains static. Digital Media, Cnet news. Retrieved from http://news.cnet.com/8301–1023_3–10297935-93.html. Ku, K. Y. L. (2009). Assessing students’ critical thinking performance: urging for measurements using multi-response format. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2, 70–76. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2009.02.001. Lehman, D. R., Lempert, R. O., & Nisbett, R. E. (1988). The effects of graduate training on reasoning: formal discipline and thinking about everyday-life events. American Psychologist, 43(6), 431–442. doi: 10.1037/0003–066X.43.6.431. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon Jr. W.E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli J. E., Ritchey K. A., Smith R. A., & Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McKinnon, J. W., & Renner, J. W. (1971). Are colleges concerned with intellectual development? American Journal of Psychology, 39, 1047–1052. Moseley, D., Baumfield, V., Elliott, J., Gregson, M., Higgins, S., Miller, J., & Newton D. P. (2005). Frameworks for thinking: a handbook for teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nisbett, R. E. (1992). Rules for reasoning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Performance Management Services, Inc. (2006). What is PBDS?. Retrieved from http:// www.pmsi-pbds.com on July 11, 2007. Proctor, P., Compton, W., Grossman, J., & Fanjiang, G. (2005). Building a better delivery system: a new engineering/health care partnership. Institute of Medicine and National Academy of Engineering. Washington, D. C.: The Nationals Academies Press. Redden, E. (2010). Bologna beyond Europe. Higher Education News. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/06/07/bologna. Sternberg, R. J., Roediger, H. L., III., & Halpern, D. F. (Eds.). (2007). Critical thinking in psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press. Sursock, A., & Smidt, H. (2010). Trends 2010: a decade of change in European higher education. EUA Publications. Retrieved from http://www.eua.be/fileadmin/user_ upload/files/Publications/Trends_2010.pdf. Walsh, C. M., Seldomridge, L. A., & Badros, K. K. (2007). California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory: further factor analytic examination. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 104, 141–151. Doi: 10.2466/PMS.104010141–151.

40


Wang, Q., Woo, H. L., & Zhao, J. (2009). Investigating critical thinking and knowledge construction in an interactive learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 17, 95–104. Doi: 10.1080.10494820701706320. Wilson, K. (2010). Evidence-based medicine. The good, the bad, the ugly. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 16, 398–400. doi:10.1111/j.1365–2753.2010.01408.x.

4 Enhancing Ethical Literacy of Psychologically Literate Citizens Graham R. Davidson and Shirley A. Morrissey

C

onsider the case of an undergraduate student who works casually as a respite carer for a local nongovernmental organization to help pay her university tuition fees. Her role brings her into contact with some fulltime welfare professionals and family guardians who, in her opinion, do not always act in the welfare interests of disabled clients for whom she cares. She would like to understand better these welfare professional standards, the legal and moral rights of her disabled clients, the rights of family guardians, and her own responsibilities to ensure her clients are treated safely and with dignity. Consider the case of an undergraduate student who works casually at a fastfood outlet where he notices that one of the supervisors behaves in an overly familiar fashion with some casual employees from ethnic minority backgrounds. The employees who grin and bear the advances seem to get the extra shifts. As a fellow employee whom they respect, he hears their dissatisfaction with the supervisor’s conduct but, at the same time, he needs the work and does not wish to rock the boat. Lastly, consider the case of the cash-poor undergraduate student who finds a wallet containing identification documents and a sizeable sum of money. The student contemplates keeping the cash but returning the wallet to its owner on the pretext that it contained only the identification documents when it was found on the sidewalk. Like it or not, psychology undergraduates are very likely to encounter situations that challenge their personal sense of good and bad, right and wrong, and efforts to do what they think is right, irrespective of whether they undertake further study required for licensing as a psychologist. With this in mind, there is increasing acknowledgment that undergraduate psychology education should ensure that psychology students receive, at the very least, some foundational knowledge about ethics to enhance their psychological literacy (McGovern et al., 2010). The definition of psychological literacy also incorporates the notion that recipients understand and respect diversity. Although diversity is undefined, in

42

T h e P s y ch o l o g i cally L i t e r at e C i t i z e n

this context it might reasonably be interpreted as ethnic, linguistic, cultural, and social diversity. Graduates demonstrate psychological literacy (i.e., act as citizens) by applying their psychological and ethical knowledge in ways that enhance their positive engagement with the community at large. Globally literate citizenry fosters intercultural understanding and engagement (Cranney & Dunn, Chapter 1 in this volume)—but in this context, what is meant by ethical literacy, acting ethically, respecting diversity, and engaging ethically with others? This chapter addresses those questions, along with questions about how educators may enhance ethical literacy in the course of undergraduate psychology education. This essential goal of ethical literacy is commensurate with the stated undergraduate quality guidelines (American Psychological Association [APA], 2007) and program accreditation standards (Australian Psychology Accreditation Council [APAC], 2009) for undergraduate psychology education respectively in the United States and Australia. In the former jurisdiction, the APA (2007) guidelines for undergraduate psychology, which elaborate on the APA (2002) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, include among their education goals: (1) imparting a general understanding of the ethical princiÂ�ples and code of conduct (APA, 2002, goal 1.2); (2) acting ethically generally and in research (goals 2.5 and 5.1); (3) identifying ethical issues that might ensue from psychological applications (goal 4.5); (4) using information and technology in an ethical manner (goal 6.3); (5) being sensitive to ethnic and cultural issues (goal 7.4); and (6) managing professional conflicts in an ethical manner (goal 7.5). The Australian Psychology Accreditation Council (APAC, 2009) accreditation standards are less prescriptive about undergraduate ethics education but contain a requirement for 3-year graduates to (1) acquire knowledge of the Australian Psychological Society’s (APS) Code of Ethics (2007) and Ethical Guidelines; (2) evaluate research and other ethical conduct in accordance with the Code and Guidelines (graduate attribute 4); and (3) use information ethically (graduate attribute 4). In the fourth year, students should receive instruction in professional and research ethics (standÂ� ard 4.1.8). Thus, it is reasonable to assume that undergraduate psychology education in Australia and North America imparts some aspects of ethical literacy. However, the reality of undergraduate psychology education, at least in Australia, does not support this assumption. An analysis of Australian undergraduate psychology syllabi by Davidson, Garton, and Joyce (2003) found, despite accreditation standards, that ethics education appeared in less than one quarter of syllabi for years 1 to 3 (which constitutes the bachelor degree in Australia, in contrast to the 4-year bachelor degree in the United States) and approximately 90% of syllabi for years 4 (an additional preprofessional, honors-level year, involving a research project as well as introductory professional training) and years 5 to 7 (master’s and doctoral training). There was an emphasis on some form of integrative approach in years 1 to 3 and approximately equal emphasis on integration and separation in year 4 (where integration means integrating ethical issues into other content; and separation means teaching “stand-alone” courses on ethics). Within the small proportion of 3-year undergraduate syllabi that included ethics, there was approximately equal emphasis

Enhancing Ethical Literacy of Psychologically Literate Citizens

43

on philosophical and code-based instruction, but instruction in year 4 was mainly based on the APS Code of Ethics. Lastly, research ethics was the predominant theme in years 1 to 3, followed by a comprehensive listing of professional topics in year 4. It is worth remembering that 4-year graduates in Australia may register with provisional conditions as psychologists. The lack of emphasis on ethics education in Australian programs is reflected in graduates’ negative perceptions of their ethics preparation for practice. For example, 16% to 20% of practicing psychologists surveyed in Australia held negative opinions about the ethics education they received, and more than half of comÂ� pleting fourth-year students reported receiving inadequate ethics instruction (Morrissey & Symons, 2006; Sullivan, 2005). Lipp and colleagues (2006) reported that Australian psychology educators place little importance on pre-professional ethics education. These findings paint a sufficiently gloomy picture of underÂ� graduate psychology education as preparation for ethical psychological practice. They offer no encouragement that such an education provides sufficient grounding for ethical reasoning and action in everyday living. This attribute of psyÂ�chological literacy is clearly absent from Australian undergraduate psychology education. Contemporary practice overall in undergraduate psychology education in the United States is less well documented, although there is a substantial body of literature on how to teach ethics, which we address later. Some evidence suggests that ethics education for undergraduate psychology students might be done better. For example, Amsel and Kay (2006) compared the performance of psychology and non-psychology undergraduate majors at various year levels on tests of methodological and ethical reasoning. While first-year students scored significantly lower on ethical reasoning than seniors, the correlation between ethical reasoning scores and the number of psychology courses completed was close to zero. These findings may reflect the number of courses in the syllabus that contain a component on ethics. Dunn and associates (2010) recommended that psychology syllabi incorporate ethics and diversity issues across all coursework components rather than covering ethics topics in only a limited set of courses, such as research methods and clinical and social psychology. Although expansion of the ethics component in the curriculum is very important, it is unlikely to be beneficial unless there are educational templates for developing ethically literate citizens that address questions about what is meant by ethical literacy, what the ethically literate citizen should know and comprehend, and how ethical literacy might be imparted.

Ethical Literacy A basic definition of ethics may assist with answers to these questions. Ethics is defined here as “the philosophical study of good conduct” (Ross, 1930, p. 102) and ethical decision making as making moral choices that are based on philosophical theories of good conduct. Ethical conduct, therefore, encompasses thoughts and actions that are commensurate with philosophical theories of good conduct.

44


Ethical theory is any theory that offers an account of ethical thought and action and makes provision in one way or another for testing the correctness of the assumptions on which the theory is based. Good conduct involves acts or omissions that are morally good or right. Rightness and wrongness are terms that refer to what is done (i.e., acts), while goodness and badness are terms that involve judgments about motives that give rise to those acts (Ross, 1930). Our cash-poor student above, for example, may return the wallet with the cash, partly out of sympathy for the owner and partly out of concern for being seen to remove the money; but the right thing to do is to return the wallet and contents intact irrespective of the reason for doing this. On what theoretical assumptions should instructors, supervisors, and students proceed, therefore, when faced with everyday moral decisions? Although the undergraduate psychology guidelines and standards summarized above require that psychology students acquire knowledge of the relevant national research and professional codes, they do not outline ethical theories that are broadly acceptable for the purpose of examining the moral dimension of either professional or personal conduct. The national research and professional codes themselves (e.g., APA, 2002; APS, 2007; NHMRC, 2007) uniformly adopt a deontological (principlebased) approach to professional and research ethics, which is acknowledged as having certain strengths and weaknesses (Davidson, 2006). It is also important to realize that the APS (2007) and APA (2002) codes of ethics or conduct do not apply to psychologists’ personal conduct, which is exempt from scrutiny, barring exceptional circumstances where disreputable or illegal personal conduct is sufficiently serious so that it weakens public confidence in the profession (but see McGovern, Chapter 21 in this volume, on character strengths of faculty). How then should undergraduate psychology syllabi be framed in order to foster awareness of moral decision making beyond the research laboratory or consulting room? How might our cash-poor student above determine whether to return the wallet intact or return the wallet but keep the cash? How might our fast-food worker above weigh his personal financial interests against the safety needs and dignity of vulnerable coworkers? The literature contains some useful exemplars for teaching ethical theory to psychology undergraduates. Fine and Ulrich (1988) suggested a course of study for inclusion in professional training that taught students about the basic precepts underpinning utilitarian and deontological ethics, which are briefly described below. The course curriculum they outlined began with students learning about those two ethical theories, followed by some rules for ethical decision making. Everyday life issues such as health, illness, suicide, and mental health were then discussed using those ethical frameworks. In the process, students examined their personal ethical reasoning about everyday issues. However, ideal utilitarian (maximization of good) and deontological (selfevident principles) theories are not necessarily every student’s preferred personal moral reasoning framework. Miner (2006) constructed a curriculum that outlines and considers the philosophical pros and cons of ideal utilitarianism, deontological


45

theories, normative relativism (group standards), and classical virtue theory (being of good character). We suggest that hedonistic utilitarianism (maximization of pleasure), intuitionism (discretionary principles), radical relativism (individual values), and moral skepticism (uncertainty about the existence of moral values and standards) could usefully be included in this list. Students are directed to examine each philosophical alternative in terms of their own personal views of what is right or good and then to consider how their personal values and beliefs influence their views of morality. Miner suggested a set of decision-making steps that require students not only to consider questions that each of the major ethical theories may pose in relation to the matter under consideration but also to evaluate the quality and truthfulness of their argument, the reasonableness of the conclusion reached, the proposed course of action, and the benefits of those decision outcomes over alternative conclusions and actions. Miner’s comprehensive decision model would offer our respite carer an opportunity to compare principle-based, discretionary duty, utilitarian, and virtue-based analyses of her work predicament. Davidson (2006) examined the relevance of prima facie (discretionary) duty theory (Ross, 1930, 1939) for professional decision making, comparing and contrasting its advantages with the limitations imposed on ethical reasoning by ideal utilitarian, deontological, and classical virtue theories of ethics. Davidson set out a series of seven decision steps, based on Ross’s theory and priority ordering of conditional responsibilities, for determining the rightness or wrongness of alternative courses of action. According to Ross (1930), such decisions about what is right or wrong must be discretionary because one may have competing responsibilities to more than one other party. Our respite carer above must consider her duty to the disabled clients for whom she cares as well as to family guardians for whom she offers temporary relief from the care role. Davidson maintained that these decision steps and Ross’s priority ordering of moral responsibilities are equally applicable in situations where a moral dilemma or no moral dilemma exists as well as in situations involving personal or professional decision making. They are equally applicable, for example, to decisions about returning a lost wallet, keeping a meeting appointment, fidelity in intimate friendships, assisting a cowÂ� orker, respecting the environment, or assisting a loved one to die, as they are to respecting clients’ and carers’ rights to autonomy or safeguarding the best interests of research participants. So what are the essentials of ethical literacy and what might reasonably be expected of psychology undergraduates? • Ethically literature citizens have a disciplined knowledge of, and theoretical approach to, moral decision making. They have a vocabulary for talking about morality. Their vocabulary acquires meaning from their knowledge of a number of moral philosophical perspectives. • They understand the rules imposed on moral decision making by those different theories.

46


• They are familiar with, and practice using, an ethical decision framework for identifying and prioritizing alternative ways of responding when they are confronted with a moral issue. They understand the implications of different moral perspectives for evaluating those alternatives (although they may prefer one moral perspective over other moral perspectives and, thus, one alternative course of action over others). • They understand and apply appropriate evaluative criteria provided by their preferred moral perspective to determine whether their proposed or actual conduct is ethical. • Finally, they are meta-ethical and reflective in the sense that they are able to generalize their ethics vocabulary, knowledge of theory, decision steps, and evaluative criteria to help them understand what is right or wrong, good or bad, in a diversity of personal and professional situations. • All other things being equal, in their personal and professional lives they do what is right and for the right reasons rather than for the wrong reasons and not what is wrong. What are some key everyday ethical challenges for which students might, and should, be prepared? It is reasonable, using the vocabulary and theoretical perspectives to which students have been introduced, that they are able to generalize from classroom-based vignettes to questions about ethics in the workplace, in their relationships with others, and in society at large. They understand the demands of moral agency (personal responsibility). As psychologically literate citizens, they understand psychology’s ethical base and health ethics more generally and, as consumers of health services, they have a clear understanding of their consumer rights and where those rights come from. In developing respect for the rights and dignity of others, they examine the ethical underpinnings of social justice and responsibility, including the ethics of social advocacy and social and cultural tolerance. They examine the precepts of intellectual and commercial honesty. They appreciate that ethics is not only about how one treats others but also how one treats oneself. They understand the philosophical basis of self-development and self-care. They are aware of legal systems and organizational policies that intersect with moral considerations. Finally, with those other considerations in mind, students are able to determine where they would “start” if the need to exercise their own, or others,’ moral rights and responsibilities arises. This set of considerations includes strategies that might be used to resolve ethical disagreements. Although there may be other suitable curriculum models for teaching ethics to psychology undergraduates, it is important that there should be a curriculum component that involves formal instruction in ethics. The literature suggests that leaving learning about ethics to chance or to vicarious experience—learning ethics by osmosis (Handelsman, 1986)—is ineffective. A clear curriculum commitment is required. However, didactic approaches to ethics instruction by themselves are not necessarily the most effective approaches for engaging students in ethical examination of their everyday lives and self-reflection about their own behavior. We now offer some suggestions for bringing ethics education “to life.”


47

Methods for Enhancing Ethical Literacy If psychology undergraduates are to become meta-ethical citizens (i.e., responsible citizens who, as a starting point, consciously examine the ethics of any personal or professional situation), a traditional didactic approach to teaching ethics may not work well as a means of developing a moral framework for refÂ� lection and action. Although formal courses in interdisciplinary and medical ethical decision making (e.g., Allegretti & Frederick, 1995; Self & Olivarez, 1996; Self, Baldwin, & Wolinsky, 1992) and formal training in ethical theory (Bloch, 1988; Bruneau, 1998; Fine & Ulrich, 1988) have been shown to improve students’ ability to analyze ethical issues, our recommendation is for integrating formal instruction in ethical theory with a variety of experiential approaches that allow students to apply theories and moral precepts they have learned, practice steps in their ethical decision-making framework, and question the moral status quo. Integrative approaches may involve conventional classroom-based instruction, such as incorporating aspects of professional and research ethics into undergraduate teaching sessions (e.g., Dunn et al., 2010; Fisher & Kuther, 1997), or problembased learning approaches that take students outside of the classroom. There are already various innovative approaches to undergraduate and graduate ethics education that suit this purpose, and the latter can be generalized to the undergraduate classroom. Conventional classroom-based experiential approaches are known to be powerful instructional methods of teaching ethics. A number of these approaches have involved analysis of cases, vignettes, or examples of moral dilemmas (Chen, 2003; Fisher & Kuther, 1997; Sapp, 1995; Self, Olivarez, & Baldwin, 1998; Self, Wolinsky, & Baldwin, 1989). Others have employed various role-play methods (Haddad, 1988; Rosnow, 1999; Strohmetz & Skleder, 1999). Johnson and Corser (1998) subjected students to the experience of appearing before a mock professional complaints committee consisting of other class members. Students rotated through the roles of complaints committee member and respondent in the complaint. The mock committees ran in class for about 2 hours each week during the semester. Students rated their experiences of the mock committees and related lecture and discussion activities very highly. Plante (1998) used a uniquely extensive combination of formal instruction, video presentations of health and community critical incidents, facilitated group discussion, structured ethical decision making, and reflective journals and assessments. Formal instruction focused on culturally relative, egoistic, social contract, virtue, and deontological ethical theories, which were then compared and contrasted as the experiential components of the curriculum were introduced. Students also undertook a placement as a volunteer with a community organization and discussed ethical issues that arose in the course of their placement. At the end of the semester, students rated the course overall, group discussions, and the volunteer placement experience very highly. Smith, Fryer-Edwards, Diekema, and Braddock (2004) compared instruction involving written case analyses alone with written case analyses combined with class discussions. Medical students who had the added advantage of class discussions improved

48


their analysis of ethical scenarios noticeably more over the course of the semester than those students for whom class discussions were not scheduled. There is further evidence for using discursive instruction in the teaching of ethics. Molewijk, Abma, Stopler, and Widdershoven (2008) based their ethical instruction of medical students on ethical perspectives of pragmatic hermeneutics and dialogical ethics. The pragmatic hermeneutic perspective eschews fixed ethical principles and abstract reasoning, focusing instead on social and historical complexities of presenting issues and seeking resolution through careful examination of all available contextual contingencies. Dialogical perspectives seek resolution through exploring shared understandings of the issues and possible solutions. Everyday practical moral challenges become storied accounts through and by which teachers and their students interpret and understand the right course of action or about the character of the student as practitioner. These storied exchanges (moral case deliberations) may be directed toward moral cases that present themselves to students in their healthcare placements or in related extracurricular employment settings. Formulating an understanding of the perspectives of welfare professionals, family guardians, and organizational management and of relevant legal and professional issues pertaining to care, and then being able to discuss those perspectives and issues with an instructor, may better assist our respite carer above to determine the right course of action in response to future concerns about her clients’ care than simply just expecting that she will intuit the right course of action from her reading of relevant law, professional standards, and organizational policies. We believe also that our fast-food worker above and the vulnerable coworkers who have placed their faith in him would benefit from him having the opportunity to discuss with an instructor the right course of action in the circumstances, including the pros and cons of ignoring the work supervisor’s behavior. We argue that educators should not draw the line on developing our fast-food worker’s ethical literacy just because his immediate work is not psychology. Molewijk and colleagues (2008) found that both students and supervising professionals rated these moral case deliberations as essential, valuable components of the supervised placement experience, but two pedagogical issues became clear as the trial progressed. Field supervisors need to be trained to understand and apply these theoretical perspectives on ethics; and adopting a discursive stance on the actual ethical challenges confronting students on healthcare placement can be extremely demanding in terms of time, cognitive effort, and emotional preoccupation, which can lead to burnout for supervisors. This model of discursive instruction is not dissimilar from the models explored by Ewashen and Lane (2007), who cautioned health placement supervisors about the need to maintain firm boundaries around discursive encounters so that they do not assume a therapeutic role with placement students. Other mixed models of narrative encounters designed to encourage a discursive understanding of everyday ethics have been suggested. Ogur, Hirsh, Krupat, and Bor (2007) tested what they described as an integrated clerkship program for medical students. In addition to providing supervised services for medical patients, students participated in weekly case-based tutorials and received regular


49

mentoring, as well as studying a social science curriculum designed to encourage self-reflection and build community awareness and cultural competence. Donohoe and Danielson (2004) suggested a healthcare training model called medical humanities, involving interdisciplinary classrooms of healthcare, literature, and other majors, with the aim being to expose healthcare majors to diverse storied accounts of health, illness, and morality (see also Andre et al., 2003). These classroom-based experiential approaches, when used separately or in combination with formal instruction, have generally resulted in improvements in students’ ethical decision-making performance. However, they have limitations. Ethics is not just a matter of determining what the right course of action in any set of circumstances is, but of doing the right thing. Students need to have practice at doing what is right and to experience the challenges of acting ethically when doing so is socially, organizationally, or professionally unpopular, or when it means confronting real practical obstacles. Our respite carer above may be encouraged not only to obtain relevant information on welfare professional standards and guardianship policies but also to discuss her concerns about her disabled clients’ care in a respectful manner with the welfare professional or family guardian. Second, classroom critical incident analysis leaves open the possibility of students learning to compartmentalize their ethical decision making. In a carefully constructed hypothetical situation the right way forward may be clear and logical. In everyday situations, however, the right way forward may be less clear and more difficult to implement. Moreover, we have already mentioned that professional codes usually apply only when one is acting professionally. Thus, there may be a tendency for students to compartmentalize behavior into that which is covered by workplace and professional codes and that which is personal and part of private life. Not only may students not be challenged to practice what they know they should do; they may not be challenged to think about the type of person they should be. Our cash-strapped student should reasonably understand that returning the wallet sans cash is as equally wrong as embellishing a work résumé, irrespective of whether or not the wallet’s owner appears well-to-do, the act goes undetected, or the rent remains unpaid. Some educators have responded to such concerns by exploring applications of classical virtue theories (e.g., in health services training). Begley (2006), for example, placed emphasis on the Aristotelian concept of moral virtue or good character. She maintained that good character is a skill that can be taught and that the measure of success is the extent to which people display their moral character through their wise judgment and actions (cf., Peterson & Seligman, 2004, on character strengths and virtues; see also McGovern, Chapter 21 in this volume). Good character is acquired by practicing virtuous conduct as well as by observing others who display excellence in character through their actions, wise judgment, and counsel. However, acquisition of good character also requires critical selfreflection, which leads to a transcendental (self-actualizing) understanding of what is good and the attainment of good character. If excellence in character comes with practice, it might be expected that undergraduates start as ethical novices but, through observation, understanding, and the practice of good, become

50


ethical experts (cf., Halonen et al., 2003, on development of scientific, ethical, and value-based insight in undergraduate research training). Knowledge of good character may be acquired through self-reflection on, and sharing understanding about, not only the examples teachers set for their students but also other storied accounts of virtuous conduct contained in literature, cinema, and other media. Kopelman (1999), too, argued that no instructional engagement is value-free but that instructors model excellent character through the topics they include formally in the curriculum and raise informally in class, the readings they set, the ethical vignettes they choose for analysis, and their examples of good and poor character in storied accounts of ethical conduct. Kopelman’s account of teaching the virtues emphasizes the importance of teachers reflecting on the values that underpin these aspects of their teaching as well as on how and when they overtly model good conduct for their students. There are existing precedents for Â�character education in formal schooling (Prestwich, 2004).

Implications for Undergraduate Learning and Teaching Ethically literate citizens have knowledge of moral theory and terminology; understand and apply models of ethical decision making; comprehend contextual complexities in which moral, legal, organizational, and other factors influence how they might respond; demonstrate the ability to apply their knowledge and decision-making capabilities in everyday situations; demonstrate an intellectual commitment to moral issues such as respect for people’s rights, social justice, and inclusivity; and behave morally when the situation requires them to act. Ethics instruction should include a formal introduction to moral theory followed by, and/or integrated with, a variety of experiential and storied learning opportunities that allow students to practice sound ethical reasoning and good character. However, there are some impediments to this aspirational model of ethics education in the undergraduate psychology curriculum. Space needs to be found in the syllabus for classes on moral theory. Lipp and colleagues (2006) reported on curriculum overcrowding in Australian undergraduate psychology education and on a lack of commitment among Australian psychology educators to the teaching of ethics. Introducing instruction in moral theory may require compromise on what is compulsory in the undergraduate syllabus (Donohoe & Danielson, 2004). Second, our aspirational model depends on educators who have sufficient grounding in moral philosophy to be able to teach it, a commitment to raising students’ awareness of morally significant issues, and the knowledge and confidence required for them to be role models for students (Davidson, Garton, & Joyce, 2003). Educators should also be confident about sharing stories that contain instances of both morally good and morally questionable conduct. Intensive engagement with students through storied exchanges on ethical issues may tax educators who teach this aspect of the syllabus and may have resource implications (Molewijk et al., 2008).


51

Finally, to be of good character or, alternatively, to decipher and do the right thing, students need to be able to “practice” being ethical (Begley, 2006) and share stories about the decisions they make, the reasons for their decisions, and how decisions are translated into action (Molewijk et al., 2008). They require opportunities to transfer their classroom knowledge to other everyday situations that challenge them ethically. These experiences seemingly are easier to incorporate into postgraduate professional training than into undergraduate programs. MoreÂ� over, we suggest that interpretation and application of the scientist-practitioner training model in Australian psychology education, as well as unduly conservative concerns about breaching registration (licensing) legislation, has actively discouraged undergraduate psychology programs from including some form of work experience. The integration of undergraduate classroom and experiential learning opportunities resembles recent initiatives that have been labeled work-integrated learning (WIL), but such initiatives have had limited uptake. There is a need to expand WIL initiatives in innovative ways to provide psychology undergraduates with an opportunity to gain experience of the ethical challenges that workplaces generate before, and not after, they graduate. Various forms of workplace experience could be incorporated into capstone courses for all undergraduate psychology majors. Psychology is capable of producing ethically literate baccalaureates, but syllabi, educators’ professional development, instructional approaches, and workplace oppÂ� ortunities need to change for this to become the norm rather than the exception.

Suggested Curriculum Activities Keeping in mind the range of relevant interactive and dialectical instructional strategies outlined briefly above, as well as the importance of contextualizing ethical action in real-world work and personal situations, we now offer several classroom activities for enhancing ethical literacy. • Students study the novel Sophie’s World (Gaarder, 1995). Class discussion and written assessment focus on students’ overview of the origins of moral philosophy, how they would describe their own philosophical leaning, and the novel’s message. • Students observe a peaceful, social demonstration. Through class discussion and written assessment, students reflect on the issues of social concern, related moral perspectives, and the act of demonstration. Students discuss whether psychological knowledge should influence social policy and which types of social action are ethically justifiable. They consider social causes to which they may have a moral commitment. • Students undertake some form of unsupervised work placement or volunteer work and keep a reflective journal on the ethical issues with which they were confronted.

52


• Students keep a file of contemporary social and environmental issues in the media and, through class discussion and written assessment, reflect on the moral dimensions of those issues. • Students watch a movie such as Road to Guantanamo and, in class, debate the moral rightness of treating innocent people unjustly (i.e., as collateral damage) in order to safeguard the freedom, safety, security, or quality of life of the majority. Students learn about and discuss the concept of “just war.” • Students explore examples of ethically problematical research in which individuals’ rights have been infringed allegedly for the benefits of society at large. • Students study a publicly well-documented, high-profile case involving breaches of professional ethics. Such cases may relate to a breach of health, business, or other professional systems of ethics. Students analyze the case from a variety of theoretical perspectives (e.g., deontological, ideal utilitarian, virtue) as well as from the ethical perspective of the professional group in question. Students reflect, where possible, on the moral questions raised in public coverage of the case. Finally, students reflect on, and discuss, what they might have done if they (or a close colleague, friend, or relative) were the professional practitioner in question or an aggrieved party. • Students search the Web, Yellow Pages, or print media for what may be morally questionable public statements, articles, or advertisements about products and services. Students analyze those statements from a variety of theoretical perspectives, as well as from the ethical perspective of the group or industry in question and fair trading legislation. Finally, students reflect on, and discuss, what may constitute a morally defensible course of action if a person is aggrieved by one or more of these statements.

References Allegretti, C. L., & Frederick, J. N. (1995). A model for thinking critically about ethical issues. Teaching of Psychology, 22, 46–48. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073. American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, D. C.: Author. Amsel, E., & Kay, T. S. (2006). The growth of methodological and ethical reasoning among psychology students. Paper presented at the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association Annual Meeting, Park City, Utah, April 20–22, 2006. Downloaded from PsycInfo on 06/04/2010, Unique Identifier 576822006–001. Andre, J., Brody, H., Fleck, L., Thomason, C. L., & Tomlinson, T. (2003). Ethics, professionalism, and humanities at Michigan State University College of Human Medicine. Academic Medicine, 78, 968–972.


53

Australian Psychological Society. (2007). Code of ethics. Melbourne, VIC: Author. Australian Psychology Accreditation Council. (2009). Rules for accreditation and accreditation standards for psychology courses. Melbourne, VIC: Author. Begley, A. M. (2006). Facilitating the development of moral insight in practice: teaching ethics and teaching virtue. Nursing Philosophy, 7, 257–265. Bloch, S. (1988). Teaching psychiatric ethics. Medical Education, 22, 550–553. Bruneau, S. (1998). Adding PEP (protocol, ethics, and policies) to the preparation of new professionals. Ethics and Behavior, 8, 249–267. Chen, D. T. (2003). Curricular approaches to research ethics training for psychiatric investigators. Psychopharmacology, 171, 112–119. Davidson, G. R. (2006). Toward an ethical framework for psychological practice. In S. A. Morrissey & P. Reddy (Eds.), Ethics and professional practice for psychologists (pp. 1–13). Melbourne, VIC: Thomson. Davidson, G. R., Garton, A. F., & Joyce, M. (2003). Survey of ethics education in Australian university schools and departments of psychology. Australian Psychologist, 38, 216–222. Donohoe, M., & Danielson, S. (2004). A community-based approach to the medical humanities. Medical Education, 38, 204–217. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology Â�curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in Â�psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Ewashen, C., & Lane, A. (2007). Pedagogy, power and practice ethics: clinical teaching in psychiatric/mental health settings. Nursing Inquiry, 14, 255–262. Fine, M. A., & Ulrich, L. P. (1988). Integrating psychology and philosophy in teaching a graduate course in ethics. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19, 542–546. Fisher, C. B., & Kuther, T. L. (1997). Integrating research ethics into the introductory psychology course curriculum. Teaching of Psychology, 24, 172–175. Gaarder, J. (1995). Sophie’s world: a novel about the history of philosophy. London, UK: Phoenix House. Haddad, A. M. (1988). Teaching ethical analysis in occupational therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 42, 300–304. Halonen, J. S., Bosack, T., Clay, S., & McCarthy, M. (with Dunn, D. S., Hill IV, G. W., McEntarfer, R., Mehrotra, C., Nesmith, R., Weaver, K., & Whitlock, K.). (2003). A rubric for authentically learning, teaching, and assessing scientific reasoning in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 196–208. Handelsman, M. M. (1986). Problems with ethics training by “osmosis.” Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 17, 371–372. Johnson, W. B., & Corser, R. (1998). Learning ethics the hard way: facing the ethics committee. Teaching of Psychology, 25, 26–28. Kopelman, L. M. (1999). Values and virtues: how should they be taught? Academic Medicine, 74, 1307–1310. Lipp, O. et al. (2006). Learning outcomes and curriculum development in psychology. Chippendale, NSW: Carrick Institute. http://www.carrickinstitute.edu.au/carrick/ webdav/site/carricksite/users/siteadmin/public/grants_2005project_learningoutcomes_psychology_finalreport.pdf (downloaded 7 January, 2008).

54


McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E., Holmes J. D., Kuebli, J. E., et al. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Miner, M. (2006). A proposed comprehensive model for ethical decision-making. In S. A. Morrissey & P. Reddy (Eds.), Ethics and professional practice for psychologists (pp. 25–37). Melbourne, VIC: Thomson. Molewijk, A. C., Abma, T., Stolper, M., & Widdershoven, G. (2008). Teaching ethics in the clinic: the theory and practice of moral case deliberation. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34, 120–124. Morrissey, S. A., & Symons, M. (2006). Teaching ethics for professional psychological practice. In S. A. Morrissey & P. Reddy (Eds.), Ethics and professional practice for psychologists (pp. 113–125). Melbourne, VIC: Thomson. National Health and Medical Research Council. (2007). National statement on ethical conduct in human research. Canberra, Australia: Author. Ogur, B., Hirsh, D., Krupat, E., & Bor, D. (2007). The Harvard Medical School–Cambridge integrated clerkship: an innovative model of clinical education. Academic Medicine, 82, 397–404. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: a handbook and classification. New York: Oxford University Press; Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Plante, T. G. (1998). Teaching a course on psychology ethics to undergraduates. Teaching of Psychology, 25, 286–287. Prestwich, D. L. (2004). Character education in America’s schools. School Community Journal, 14, 139–150. Rosnow, R. L. (1999). Teaching research ethics through role-play and discussion. In M. E. Ware & C. L. Brewer (Eds.), Handbook for teaching statistics and research methods (2nd ed., pp. 137–139). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ross, W. D. (1930). The right and the good. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Ross, W. D. (1939). Foundations of ethics. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Sapp, M. (1995). Teaching ethics to mental health practica students at the master’s level: a comparative study. College Student Journal, 29, 333–339. Self, D. J., Baldwin, D. C. Jr., & Wolinsky, P. O. (1992). Evaluation of teaching medical ethics by an assessment of moral reasoning. Medical Education, 26, 178–184. Self, D. J., & Olivarez, M. (1996). Retention of moral reasoning skills over the four years of medical education. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 8, 195–199. Self, D. J., Olivarez, M., & Baldwin, D. C. Jr. (1998). The amount of small-group casestudy discussion needed to improve moral reasoning skills of medical students. Academic Medicine, 73, 521–523. Self, D. J., & Olivarez, M. (1996). Retention of moral reasoning skills over the four years of medical education. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 8, 195–199. Self, D. J., Walinsky, F. D., & Baldwin, DeW. C. Jr. (1989). The effect of teaching medical ethics on medical students’ moral reasoning. Academic Medicine, 64, 755–759. Smith, S., Fryer-Edwards, K., Diekema, D. S., & Braddock, C. H. III. (2004). Finding effective strategies for teaching ethics: a comparison trial of two interventions. Academic Medicine, 79, 265–271.


55

Strohmetz, D. B., & Skleder, A. A. (1999). The use of role-play in teaching research ethics: a validation study. In M. E. Ware & C. L. Brewer (Eds.), Handbook for teaching statistics and research methods. (2nd ed., pp. 140–142). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sullivan, K. (2005). Finding out about ethics: what sources of information do Australian psychologists find useful? Australian Psychologist, 40, 187–189.

5 The Social Psychology of Intergroup Harmony and the Education of Psychologically Literate Citizens Fiona A. White

Critical Overview

I

f the concept of a psychologically literate citizen refers to students respecting diversity and using their knowledge in ethically and socially responsible ways to directly benefit their communities (McGovern et al., 2010), then students who respond in non-prejudiced or socially inclusive ways can be considered highly literate global citizens. The psychological concepts of prejudice, intergroup bias, social inclusiveness and intergroup harmony fall within the discipline of social psychology, a core area studied in most psychology majors (e.g., Dunn et al., 2010). The challenge for social psychology educators is to effectively guide their undergraduate students to think and act in socially inclusive ways toward all racial and ethnic groups—whether it is their ethnic ingroup or “us,” the group to which they belong, OR the ethnic outgroup or “them,” the group to which they do not belong. The terms ingroup and outgroup will be used throughout this chapter and were made salient by Tajfel and Turner’s (1979) Social Identity Theory (SIT). SIT describes how people automatically classify themselves and others into groups according to sex, race, religion, or virtually any category to which they might belong, and people’s social identification to their (ethnic or religious) ingroup can provide them with a positive sense of self or self-esteem. The societal problem of intergroup bias and prejudice results when these automatic categorizations are associated with negative evaluations and actions toward outgroups. Importantly, this chapter will examine various strategies that social psychology educators can use in their teaching to effectively encourage socially inclusive thinking and behavior among their undergraduate students. In doing so, the primary goal of creating psychologically literate citizens will be one step closer to being achieved.

The Social Psychology of Intergroup Harmony

57

Current Trends to Reduce Racial Prejudice and Improve Intergroup Harmony Cooperative Contact: Direct, Extended, and Imagined Although several countries, such as Canada, the United States, and Australia, have espoused and supported multiculturalism, racial prejudice remains a societal problem. The prolongation of prejudice may be related to people’s perceptions of multiculturalism policy. Research shows that the majority of people still perceive multiculturalism as a passive policy where cultural diversity is tolerated, rather than an active policy where cultural diversity and integration between different ethnic groups is actually encouraged (Ginges & Cairns, 2000). The concept of prejudice has a long history in social psychology. One of the first definitions of prejudice was by Gordon Allport: “An antipathy based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization. It may be felt or expressed. It may be directed toward a group as a whole, or toward an individual because he [sic] is a member of that group” (1954, p. 9). Since Allport’s seminal work, there have been thousands of research publications outlining the causes of prejudice and the conditions that can reduce its deleterious effects. Policies, interventions, and education programs that passively impart cultural/ religious outgroup knowledge alone have been shown to have only short-term effects on reducing prejudice (Hill & Augoustinos, 2001; Pettigrew, Christ, Wagner, & Stellmacher, 2007). Educators need to actively involve undergraduate psychology students in teaching and research activities rather than passively measuring their outgroup attitudes. Similarly, simply defining psychological literacy and describing its merits to students is not sufficient; educators must directly provide their students with the appropriate skills to be active global citizens beyond the classroom. A plethora of social psychological research has repeatedly revealed the theoretical and practical merits of intergroup contact for reducing prejudice. For example, Pettigrew and Tropp’s (2006) meta-analysis of 696 samples conclusively revealed that greater intergroup contact is associated with lower levels of prejudice (mean r = –.22). Altogether, 94% of the samples in their analyses showed an inverse relationship between intergroup contact and prejudice. At the core of many of these successful intervention strategies to reduce prejudice is the concept of cooperative contact, an idea first formulated by Allport in his Contact Hypothesis. In fact, much of this research has included, to varying levels, Allport’s (1954) four facilitating conditions on how contact can reduce prejudice: (1) equal status of all of the groups, (2) intergroup cooperation, (3) common goals, and (4) support from an authority. One popular interpretation for this robust inverse relationship is that cooperative contact reduces the salience of the original ingroup–outgroup (ethnic) category and negative intergroup schema, which in turn improves the positive nature of the group interaction. Most noticeably, Pettigrew and Tropp (2006) concluded that not only did attitudes toward immediate

58

T he P s y cho l ogica l ly Literate C iti z e n

participants become more favorable, but so did attitudes toward the entire outgroup, outgroup members in other situations, and even outgroups not involved in the contact situation. Importantly, these findings all bode well for results to generalize beyond the classroom to ethnic outgroups that psychology undergraduate students come in contact with. Complementary explanations have been proposed in an attempt to understand the mechanisms underlying this robust effect. For instance, Dovidio, Kawakami, and Gaertner (2000) propose that the functional relations between groups change from actual competition to cooperation when racially diverse small groups participate in joint activities to achieve a common or superordinate goal. In addition, Fiske (2000) conducted a series of experiments demonstrating that the social interdependence that is inherent in cooperative interactions toward common goals is what gives contact situations their power to reduce prejudice. While the relationship between direct outgroup contact and prejudice has been widely tested, recent research studies (Cameron, Rutland, & Brown, 2007; Paolini, Hewstone, Cairns, & Voci, 2004; Turner, Hewstone, & Voci, 2007) have begun to examine indirect or extended contact. One of the original research studies on extended contact was conducted by Wright, Aron, McLaughlin-Volpe, and Ropp (1997), who showed that having ingroup friends who have outgroup friends was related to reduced levels of outgroup prejudice. Alternatively, Cameron and coworkers (2007) tested extended contact by having children read stories featuring ingroup and outgroup children in a friendship context. Other innovative ways to operationalize extended contact include White and Abu-Rayya’s (2009) Web technology or Internet approach. Here, over a 10-session program, two pairs of students from different religious backgrounds used a synchronous Internet chat tool to interact with one another without ever meeting face to face. The two pairs of students formed one group or team and the group goal was to use the online interaction time to develop an environmental solution that would benefit their country, Australia. This technologically innovative form of the extended contact paradigm is an efficient option for psychology educators, especially when it is difficult to get two segregated ethnic/religious student groups to directly interact because they are attending ethnically homogenous schools, colleges, or universities. An even more simple, resource-efficient classroom paradigm, and one of the newest intergroup contact paradigms at the moment, is imagined contact. Imagined contact involves no physical contact between the groups at hand, and is the “mental simulation of a social interaction with a member or members of an outgroup category” (Crisp & Turner, 2009, p. 34). For instance, in the experimental imagined contact condition, students should receive task instructions such as: “We would like you to spend the next 2 minutes imagining yourself meeting a Group X stranger for the first time. Imagine that during this encounter you find out some interesting and unexpected things about this person. List the interesting and unexpected things you learnt about this person.”


59

The reliance solely on student imagination of the contact situation makes it a particularly attractive paradigm for psychology educators to use in their classroom to improve intergroup harmony and develop psychological citizenship among their students. The imagined intergroup contact paradigm serves not only as a novel research paradigm in which the mechanisms underlying actual contact can be explored, but also offers an alternative educational intervention strategy to be used when physical contact is restricted or impractical. There has been strong empirical support for the imagined intergroup contact paradigm. For example, Turner, Crisp, and Lambert (2007) found that simply imagining contact with an elderly man or a gay man led to more positive evaluations of them. Turner and Crisp (2010), too, observed similar positive effects on a measure of implicit attitudes toward elderly and Muslim outgroups. Stathi and Crisp (2008) found that imagining a positive contact with an individual outgroup member led to greater projection of positive traits to the outgroup as a whole, whereas Husnu and Crisp (2010) found that Turkish Cypriot students who imagined contact with Greek Cypriots reported greater intentions toward future contact compared to those students in the no-contact control condition. In all of these studies it is not enough to have students just think about the outgroup, as this may exacerbate negative stereotypes; rather, it is the unique mental simulation of a positive contact situation that improves intergroup attitudes (Husnu & Crisp, 2010). According to Crisp and Turner (2009), the real value of imagined contact may be as an important facilitating component of an envisaged and integrated intervention package. Therefore, it may be a useful first-stage intervention tool, where at a later stage extended Internet contact or direct contact can occur— what Crisp and Turner (2009, p. 238) refer to as a “continuum of contact interventions.” The extent of the multi-method approach will depend on the amount and type of resources available to social psychology educators.

Recategorization Toward a Dual Identity A second avenue of research found to improve intergroup harmony involves a dual identity framework and has the potential to effectively complement the strategy of cooperative contact. A dual identity framework requires individuals to simultaneously maintain their ingroup identity (e.g., Catholic) as well as a common group identity (e.g., Irish) shared by the outgroup (e.g., “Protestant”). Researchers propose that recategorization in terms of a dual identity representation (e.g., “Catholic Irish” or “Protestant Irish”) reduces intergroup biases and increases intergroup harmony by extending the benefits of ingroup favoritism to former outgroup members who are now included members of the created common ingroup (e.g., “Irish”). The implementation of a dual identity frameÂ� work is particularly beneficial in multicultural societies where ethnic and religious identities are fundamental aspects of individuals’ self-concepts and are

60


unlikely to be readily abandoned. Also, attempts to produce a single group identity at the expense of one’s ethnic identity may threaten ingroup belonging and thus exacerbate outgroup prejudice (Dovidio et al., 2000). In fact, Dovidio and colleagues (2000) found that students who described themselves as both American and members of their Asian ethnic group (e.g., Asian American) had less prejudice than those who described themselves in terms of a single identity (e.g., Asian or American). Importantly, the development of a dual identity, in which the original and superordinate group membership are simultaneously salient, has been found to be beneficial for both minority and majority members. For example, research has found that minority members who adopt a dual identity style of thinking report more positive attitudes towards majority members (Gonzalez & Brown, 2006), and majority members report more positive attitudes towards minority members (Guerra, Rebelo, Monteiro, Riek, Mania, Gaertner, & Dovidio, 2010). Taking all of this into account, social psychology educators need to develop educational programs that encourage their undergraduate students to actively adopt a combination of cooperative contact and dual identity practices, or coop erative dual identity practices, to improve intergroup harmony both within and beyond the classroom.

Relationship Between Intergroup Harmony and Psychological Literacy in Undergraduate Students The cooperative dual identity research reviewed in this chapter would readily transfer to tertiary educational classroom settings. The techniques to promote intergroup harmony among our undergraduate students have the potential to be integrated into social psychology curricula that aim to increase tolerance and social inclusiveness thinking and behavior, a key aspect of psychological literacy. Traditional tertiary curricula often require passive involvement of undergraduate psychology students via lectures and/or classroom discussions of the theories and problems of prejudice or racism. In contrast, the cooperative dual identity interventions highlighted in this chapter create an active involvement of our undergraduate students that triggers cognitive and affective processes involved in intergroup contact. As children approach adolescence their attitudes about racial groups become more coherent, complex, and intense (White, Hayes, & Livesey, 2010). With increasing cognitive flexibility and widening socialization experiences compared to early adolescents (Katz & Ksansnak, 1994), late adolescence is an obvious developmental stage to continue to foster positive intergroup attitudes. In addition, university students entering the developmental period of late adolescence are most likely to include the next generation of social policymakers (White, Wooten et al., 2009)—therefore the greater their social inclusiveness education, the better. Taking this sociocognitive developmental context into account, undergraduate psychology students or late adolescents are prime candidates for


61

intergroup harmony interventions such as the cooperative dual identity practices reviewed here. The empirical literature indicates that cooperative dual identity practices can be easily integrated into undergraduate curricula and fostered in classrooms to increase intergroup harmony and thus psychological literacy in our underÂ�graduate psychology students. This educational goal can be achieved if social psychology educators can bridge the gap between conceptual representations of cooperative contact and how it is actually experienced in everyday life. Systems of segregation continue to pervade everyday life where having ingroup friends who have outgroup friends is less realistic—for example, when students attend a predominantly white college. Consequently, new and different educational methods for operationalizing direct, extended, or imagined contact among our students need to be formulated and tested. Extended contact via the Internet bypasses the formal systems of segregation. A further advantage of examining extended contact is the consistent research finding that intergroup anxiety is lower under circumstances of extended contact than during direct contact (Paolini et al., 2004). Previous frameworks have failed to incorporate the social strengths of cooperative contact and the cognitive advantages of dual identity recategorization to enhance interethnic harmony. This new integrated framework directly addresses this limitation. Recategorization in the form of dual identity provides cooperative contact situations with the cognitive mechanism needed to achieve the superorÂ� dinate or common goal—the main driver behind prejudice reduction and the promotion of intergroup harmony. The dual identity recategorization strategy would involve encouraging ethnically or religiously diverse students to think of ways in which their ethnic/religious identities can actively contribute to achieving a common goal, something that can be attained only if both ethnic/religious groups cooperate. For example, White and Abu-Rayya (2009) implemented a dual identity recategorization where high school students retained either their “Muslim” or “Catholic” identity as well as an “environmentally sustainable Australian” identity, their common identity. Allowing diversity with commonality is an essential element of any framework attempting to promote positive intergroup relations (Pedersen, Walker, & Wise, 2005). A common goal, a condition of cooperative contact, is more likely to be achieved with the recategorization of a common identity (while retaining one’s ethnic/religious identity). The integrated cooperative dual identity framework allows for a successful refashioning of a common national identity of creating an environmentally sustainable future for the country that all students call their home. A reinvigorated sense of social inclusion via a cooperative dual identity framework can begin to refashion this common national identity and restore the values of intergroup trust, respect, harmony, and citizenship. With the acquisition of these values our undergraduate students can then be truly considered psychologically literate citizens. The next section will highlight how social psychology educators can integrate this cooperative dual identity framework into the classroom to guide the development of intergroup harmony, and therefore psychologically literate citizenship, in their undergraduate students.

62


The Relationship Between Intergroup Harmony and the Psychologically Literate Global Citizen According to the Victoria International Development Education Association (n.d), a global citizen is anyone who works to make society a better place. This chapter has highlighted how global citizenship can be fostered in the social psychology classroom if educators target cooperative dual identity practices to enhance intergroup harmony among their students. It is important to recognize that beyond the classroom these students are likely to be our community leaders of the future. Creating students who are psychologically literate global citizens can be achieved by (1) ensuring that lecture content explains the importance of identifying and targeting the causes of prejudiced attitudes and discrimiÂ� natory behavior to reduce their deleterious effects, and (2) actively involving undergraduate students in research projects to equip them with the thinking, behavior, and practical research skills needed to refashion prejudiced attitudes toward outgroups to more socially inclusive attitudes. Today, prejudice and intergroup conflict continues to thrive outside the social psychology classroom. This fact suggests that there is still much to accomplish for social psychology educators and their undergraduate students, as future global citizens, to make society a better place. Several steps can be taken toward achieving global citizenship: (1) ensuring that undergraduate students are equipped with sufficient knowledge to be able to recognize prejudice outside the classroom, but more importantly encouraging them to have the courage of their convictions to practice the principles of intergroup harmony among their friends and family when they hear or see prejudice; (2) encouraging undergraduate students to actively choose to socialize and work with people from diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds; and (3) encouraging undergraduate students to actively communicate and share their knowledge about intergroup harmony principles, social inclusion, and cooperative contact with friends and family who may not have had similar tertiary educational opportunities. Therefore, the key to becoming a global citizen involves students not only being equipped with the knowledge and skills to promote intergroup harmony, but also having the courage of their convictions to actually practice these principles at every opportunity that requires it.

Intergroup Harmony Resources Promoting Development of Psychological Literacy in Undergraduate Psychology Courses This resource can be used in either second- or third-year Social Psychology practical/tutorial class. It takes approximately 40 minutes to complete over two


63

class sessions, and was designed by this chapter’s author. The resource actively involves undergraduate students in an imagined contact dual identity task. The dual identity aspect asks students to hold simultaneously salient (a) their original ingroup membership and (b) their superordinate group membership (the social psychology student) with the imagined stranger. The overall aim of this resource is to promote intergroup harmony, an important aspect of the psychologically literate global citizen. By the end of this practical intergroup harmony exercise, students will have acquired the following graduate attributes and related student learning outcomes that constitute psychological literacy (see McGovern et al., 2010): 1. Knowledge and understanding of theoretical and empirical evidence relating to imagined cooperative contact and dual identity, factors that promote intergroup harmony 2. Research methods from being actively involved in the design of a social psychology experiment, formulating hypotheses, and collecting and analyzing data 3. Critical thinking involved in evaluating the research findings and the research implications of the experiment, and completing a self-reflection exercise on how this study has the potential to make psychology students better global citizens 4. Values in psychology about enhancing intergroup harmony, respect, and trust within a culturally diverse society 5. Communication skills involved in writing up these research findings as a report and/or presenting these research findings orally to colleagues 6. Learning and application of psychology is achieved by students’ active participation in the imagined contact dual identity framework, and having them explain this paradigm to family and friends outside the classroom. Aim: Effective Strategies to Reduce Intergroup Bias Teaching Plan: Materials and Procedure Decide on an intergroup relationship (e.g., youth and the elderly; heterosexual and homosexual; ethnic majority and ethnic minority; people with and without disabilities) worthy of a research investigation. In Week 1 allocate all students in your class to a four-digit ID code that they must remember for Week 2, and ask them to complete the demographic questions (feel free to add additional questions); the Brown, Condor, Mathews, Wade, and Williams’ (1986) 10-item Ingroup Identification scale, inserting the appropriate ingroup being researched (Table 5.1); and the Intergroup Questionnaire, inserting the appropriate outgroup being researched (Table 5.2). Collect responses/questionnaires from students and enter the data into an appropriate statistical package.

Table 5.1â•‡ Demographic Questions ID Code: _ _ _ _ 1. What year were you born in?  2. What is your gender? î‡¡ Female î‡¡ Male 3.What country were you born in?___________________ Ingroup Identification Scale:

NEVER

SELDOM SOMETIMES

OFTEN

VERY OFTEN

â•‡ 1

I am a person who considers the Ingroup important.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

â•‡ 2

I am a person who identifies with the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

â•‡ 3

I am a person who feels strong ties with the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

â•‡ 4

I am a person who is glad to belong to the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

â•‡ 5

I am a person who sees myself as belonging to the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

â•‡ 6

I am a person who makes excuses for belonging to the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

â•‡ 7

I am a person who tries to hide belonging to the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

â•‡ 8

I am a person who feels held back by the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

â•‡ 9

I am a person who is annoyed to say I’m a member of the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

10

I am a person who criticizes the Ingroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

Note: The scores for items 6–10 are reversed to give a possible range of 10–50 for the whole scale. Higher scores reveal stronger ingroup identification.

Table 5.2â•‡ Intergroup Questionnaire The following set of questions concerns how you would feel mixing socially with members of the outgroup. It does not matter whether you personally have very little or no contact with members of the outgroup; we are interested in your attitude. 1. Imagine you are put in a group that is totally made up of outgroup members and you are the only ingroup member. 2. Use the following scale to explain how you would feel amongst the outgroup, compared to how you would feel within your ingroup.

NOT AT ALL

SOMEWHAT

EXTREMELY

1

I would feel HAPPY around the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

2

I would feel AWKWARD around the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

3

I would be SELF-CONSCIOUS around the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

4

I would be CONFIDENT around the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

5

I would be RELAXED around the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

6

I would feel DEFENSIVE around the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

7

I would feel WARM toward the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

8

I would feel COLD toward the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

9

I would feel NEGATIVE about the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

Table 5.2â•‡ (continued)

NOT AT ALL

SOMEWHAT

EXTREMELY

10 I would feel POSITIVE about the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

11 I would feel FRIENDLY toward the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

12 I would feel HOSTILE toward the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

13 I would be SUSPICIOUS of the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

14 I would feel TRUSTING toward the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

15 I would feel RESPECT for the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

16 I would feel CONTEMPT for the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

17 I would feel ADMIRATION for the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

18 I would feel DISGUST toward the Outgroup.

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

î‡¡

Note: The scores for items 1, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, and 17 are reversed to give a possible range of scores from 18–126 for the whole scale. Higher scores reveal more negative outgroup attitudes.


67

In Week 2 randomly allocate half the students in the classroom to the control condition and ask them to write the 4-digit ID code that was allocated to them in Week 1. Have the control condition read the following instruction: “We would like you to spend the next 2 minutes imagining an outdoor scene. Try to imagine aspects of the scene about you (e.g., is it a beach, a forest, are there trees or hills, what’s on the horizon). “Now spend 2 minutes listing the different things that you saw in the scene that you imagined.” (This instruction is designed to reinforce the effect of the imagery task.) Allocate the other half of the class to the experimental condition and ask them to write the 4-digit ID code that was allocated to them in Week 1. Have the experimental condition read the following instruction: “We would like you to spend the next 2 minutes imagining yourself meeting a person from Outgroup X, who happens to also be a social psychology student from your college/university. Imagine that during the encounter you find out some other interesting and unexpected things about this person. “Now spend 2 minutes listing the different things you learnt about the person.” (This, too, is designed to reinforce the effect of the imagery task.) Following these instructions, have all students complete the Intergroup Questionnaire for a second time (see Table 5.2), noting their 4-digit ID code on this questionnaire to ensure that their Week 2 responses can be matched to their Week 1 responses. Collect responses/questionnaires from all students and enter the data into an appropriate statistical package. Possible Ways to Analyze the Results/Findings 1. Have the teacher/student correlate the Ingroup Identification total scores with Intergroup Questionnaire total scores. According to the existing prejudice literature, the stronger one’s ingroup identification, the higher one’s negative attitudes toward the outgroup. As a consequence, one would expect to find a negative correlation between these two scores. 2. Within the Control condition calculate Week 2’s Intergroup Questionnaire mean score and then do the same for the Experimental “Imagined Cooperative Dual Identity Contact” condition. Conduct an independent samples t-test analysis to compare the Intergroup Questionnaire mean scores for each condition. According to the imagined contact literature, simply imagining a positive interaction with an outgroup member should improve one’s positive attitudes toward that outgroup. Moreover, having a common identity with that outgroup

68


member (i.e., being a social psychology student) should further increase one’s positive attitudes. Together, one would expect to find that the experimental condition has a significantly lower Intergroup Questionnaire mean score, or lower negative outgroup attitudes, than the control condition. Class Discussion Questions 1. Did you find the expected positive relationship between Week 1’s Ingroup Identification score and Intergroup Questionnaire score? Why or why not? 2. Was the expected difference between Intergroup Questionnaire mean scores for control and imagined cooperative condition found? Why or why not? 3. If you had to explain these research findings to your friends and/or family who may not have had the opportunity to study social psychology, how would you do this? 4. To what extent has this research study helped you understand how to promote intergroup harmony and social inclusiveness, and become a better global citizen?

Conclusion Intergroup harmony provides an important means by which to establish psychological literacy in our undergraduate students. This chapter has evaluated relevant theory and empirical evidence underpinning a readily transferable and robust research paradigm to promote intergroup harmony: imagined contact dual identity. This easily applied paradigm is particularly useful when actual or direct intergroup contact is impossible, as may be the case in the classroom. Moreover, this paradigm has been found to reduce the fears and negative expectations sometimes related to direct face-to-face intergroup contact, and thus can open students’ minds to the potential for successful intergroup encounters in the future (Crisp et al., 2008). Importantly, because undergraduate students are actively involved in the imagined contact dual identity paradigm, the acquisition of social inclusive thinking is also more direct, as is the acquisition of appropriate skills and values necessary for the development of psychologically literate global citizenship beyond the classroom. Finally, as psychology educators there are three important steps we can adopt to increase the likelihood that our teachings of intergroup harmony will help develop psychological literacy in our undergraduate students: 1. Ensure that our students have sufficient knowledge to be able to recognize prejudice outside the classroom, but more importantly, to


69

support them to have the courage of their convictions to practice the principles of intergroup harmony when they hear or see prejudice 2. Having directly learned the benefits of cooperative contact within this classroom exercise, to encourage our students to actively choose to socialize and work with people from different backgrounds outside the classroom 3. To encourage our students to actively communicate and share their knowledge on intergroup harmony, social inclusion, and cooperative contact with friends and family who may not have had the same tertiary educational opportunities. If these steps can be carried out, then we as educators can have some confidence that the message about the benefits of intergroup harmony fostering psychological literacy has become a global message.

References Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Brown, R., Condor, S., Mathews, A., Wade, G., & Williams, J. (1986). Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59, 273–286. Cameron, L., Rutland, A., & Brown, R. (2007). Promoting children’s positive intergroup attitudes towards stigmatised groups: extended contact and multiple classification skills training. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 31, 454–466. Crisp, R. J., Stathi, S., Turner, R. N., & Husnu, S. (2008). Imagining intergroup contact: theory, paradigm, and practice. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 1–18. Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2009). Can imagined interactions produce positive perceptions? American Psychologist, 64, 231–240. Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2000). Reducing contemporary prejudice: combating explicit and implicit bias at the individual and intergroup level. In S. Oshkamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp.137–163). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate educa tion in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Fiske, S. T. (2000). Interdependence and the reduction of prejudice. In S. Oshkamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp.115–135). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ginges, J., & Cairns, D. (2000). Social representations of multiculturalism: a faceted analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1345–1370.

70


Gonzalez, R., & Brown, R. (2006). Dual identities in intergroup contact: group status and size moderate the generalization of positive attitude change. Journal of Experi mental Social Psychology, 42, 753–767. Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., Monteiro, M. B., Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2010). How should intergroup contact be structured to reduce bias among majority and minority children? Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 445–460. Hill, M. E., & Augoustinos, M. (2001). Stereotype change and prejudice reduction: short-and long-term evaluation of a cross-cultural awareness programme. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 11, 243–262. Husnu, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2010). Imagined intergroup contact: a new technique for encouraging greater inter-ethnic contact in Cyprus. Peace and Conflict, 16, 97–108. Katz, P. A., & Ksansnak, K. R. (1994). Developmental aspects of gender role flexibility and traditionality in middle childhood and adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 30, 272–282. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Paolini, S., Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., & Voci, A. (2004). Effects of direct and indirect cross-group friendships on judgements of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: the mediating role of an anxiety-reduction mechanism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 770–786. Pedersen, A., Walker, I., & Wise, M. (2005). “Talk does not cook rice”: beyond anti-racism rhetoric to strategies for social action. Australian Psychologist, 40, 20–30. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L.R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783. Pettigrew, T. F., Christ, O., Wagner, U., & Stellmacher, J. (2007). Direct and indirect intergroup contact effects on prejudice: a normative interpretation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31, 41–425. Stathi, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2008). Imagining intergroup contact promotes projection to outgroups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 943–957. Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp.33–53). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Turner, R. N., & Crisp, R. J. (2010). Imagining intergroup contact reduces implicit preÂ� judice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 129–142. Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427–441. Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2007). Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact: the mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 369–388. Victoria International Development Education Association (n.d.). What is a global citizen? Retrieved Sept. 6, 2009, from http://www.videa.ca/global/citizen.html. White, F. A., & Abu-Rayya, H. (2009). Cooperative dual identity: A new approach to promote ethnic harmony between Muslim and non-Muslim Australians. Australian Research Council Discovery Project Grant.


71

White, F. A., Hayes, B., & Livesey, D. (2010). Developmental psychology: from Infancy to adulthood (2nd ed.). Sydney: Pearson Education Australia. White, F. A., Wooten, B., Man, J., Diaz, H., Rasiah, J., Swift, E., & Wilkinson, A. (2009). Adolescent racial prejudice development: the role of friendship quality and interracial contact. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33, 524–534. Wright, S. C., Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., & Roppe, S. A. (1997). The extended contact effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 73–90.

6 Changing the Lens Indigenous Perspectives on Psychological Literacy Pat D u d g e o n, Daw n Da r l a s to n - J o n e s, and Yvonne Clark

A

n essential type of psychological literacy that is required in all psychology courses is an understanding of and ability to work with the many cultural groups that make up a given society. This understanding and competence should include principles of social justice and how social injustice develops and is maintained. Social justice is about developing societies that are based on principles of equality and that value the human rights and dignity of all peoples, irrespective of their cultural background. This is particularly pertinent for Indigenous peoples who continue to struggle for basic human rights. Social justice is a key value in community psychology (Dalton, Elias, & Wandesman, 2007; Fox, 2000; Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002); however, we argue that its importance and necessity transcend subdisciplinary boundaries and should be a foundation to all psychology education. Proponents of critical psychology argue that psychology can no longer delude itself that it is a value-neutral endeavor (Prilleltensky & Fox, 1997). Psychology as a profession is part of a society that is shaped and directed by the values, norms, and biases that characterize a cultural and temporal location in history. Similarly, psychology practitioners and scientists operate within a spatial and temporal zone (not in a vacuum), and these practitioners and scientists are not immune from the socialization processes that construct the identities of the individuals that make up society (Prilleltensky & Fox, 1997). In this chapter we provide an overview of developments in Indigenous Australian1 studies in the psychology curriculum. The Indigenous Australian population is made up of two different cultural groups: mainland Aboriginal 1. In Australia there are many Indigenous nations, languages, and cultures, and it is difficult to identify terminology that is appropriate and acceptable to all these groups. However, the preferred term for Indigenous Australian people is “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander.” The authors use different terms according to the context in which they are situated.

Changing the Lens

73

people (90%) and Torres Strait Islander people (10%). Currently the population is over 500,000 Indigenous people, representing 2.5% of the total Australian population. There is great diversity within the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population. Australian Aboriginal culture is one of the oldest continuous cultures on earth. The history of Indigenous peoples in Australia, like that of other colonized peoples, is a bleak one involving dispossession of lands, warfare, and genocide and subsequent removal into reserves and missions (Dudgeon et al., 2010). Various policies were enacted in all states that stripped Aboriginal people of basic civil rights. These laws were not repealed until a historic referendum in 1967. Although progress has been made in Indigenous affairs, the consequence of a history of colonization has meant that Indigenous people face profound health and social inequalities. Racism continues to be a major issue for Indigenous Australians (Dudgeon et al., 2010). This situation is not unique but is one shared across the globe, particularly in settler countries where oppressed peoples are have been engaged in a struggle for equality and cultural rights (Smith, 1999). Providing opportunities for cultural understanding is a key part of achieving psychological literacy so that the institutions of society can work towards including disadvantaged and marginalized groups such as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Until recently this aspect has been neglected in Australian psychological undergraduate and graduate courses, and until recently Australian psychology has not equipped students to address Indigenous disadvantage or to provide services that are meaningful for Indigenous people. In addition, Australian psychology has not attracted and retained Indigenous students. Although this chapter focuses upon the Indigenous Australian context, we propose that a psychologically literate citizen anywhere is one who is culturally competent. Cultural competence requires that individuals and organizations “have a defined set of values and principles, and demonstrate behaviours, attitudes, policies and structures that enable them to work effectively cross-culturally” and further, that it is “a developmental process that evolves over an extended period. Both individuals and organizations are at various levels of awareness, knowledge and skills along the cultural competence continuum” (Cross et al., 1989, cited in NCCC, 2006, p. 1). This perspective translates into a need for a philosophical shift whereby cultural competence becomes the lens through which other content and learning is viewed, and while all university courses should include cultural competence in this manner, it is particularly pertinent for psychology. To develop genuine psychological literacy within the context of the rich narrative currently being composed in global higher education about psychologists’ social responsibilities and commitments (McGovern et al., 2010), the discipline needs to continue to move strongly towards acknowledging that we are part of a social history, and what we do as individuals and professionals has an impact on our society now and in the future. We need to acknowledge our cultural backgrounds and histories and develop a critical awareness of ourselves as individuals, as a profession, and as a discipline. Indigenous researchers have highlighted

74

T he P s y ch o l o gically L iterate C iti z en

the need for Australian psychology to recognize Australian Indigenous cultural difference, and to be culturally aware. For instance, Dudgeon and Pickett (2000) wrote: Psychologists need to seek out culturally appropriate practice in interactions with those from different cultural backgrounds—not only Indigenous people, but all the cultural groups that make up the multicultural society—so that the practitioner’s own conditioned values, assumptions, and perspectives of social reality are not imposed on others. (p. 86) Since then, considerable changes have taken place in psychology, yet more needs to occur. The recent Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage Report (SCRGSP, 2009) identified ongoing Indigenous disadvantage in areas such as health, mental health, housing, employment, education, and the justice system, and cannot be addressed until there is an understanding that service provision within the prevailing discourses does little to enhance understanding of why this disadvantage remains. A major shift in the knowledge base of the professions and the wider community is needed so that those with the power to effect change do so. Undergraduate and graduate students are still being taught within the dominant knowledge constructions and subsequently graduate without an understanding or awareness of their lack of cultural competence. This problem in turn is an important factor in the lack of appropriate services being offered to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and contributes in no small way to the cycles of disadvantage experienced by individuals and communities. Addressing this deficit in the training of psychology students through the advancement of cultural competence is one mechanism that has the potential to shift the balance and contribute to a socially responsive society predicated on the principles of social justice and human rights.

Indigenous Australians As mentioned, developing psychological literacy in terms of cultural awareness and competence needs to be a fundamental part of training in the discipline. However, the historical exclusion of groups on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or class makes this a social justice position that can be generalized across all marginalized groups. The national Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage Report (SCRGSP, 2005-2009) shows that Indigenous people are the most disadvantaged group in Australia. IndigÂ�enous disadvantage is evident across all key indicators. The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey: Australia, 2004–05 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2006) shows that Indigenous people report high to very high rates of psychological distress, up to twice that of other Australians. Relationships between social determinants and health and psychological distress are well documented (Kelly, Dudgeon, Gee, & Glaskin, 2010).

Changing the Lens

75

With regard to physical and mental health, the life expectancy of Indigenous people is 10 years less than that for other Australians, and Indigenous death rates across all age groups are higher. Suicide and self-harm rates are almost twice those of non-Indigenous Australians. Indigenous people, both men and women, are over four times more likely to be hospitalized for alcohol-related mental and behavioral disorders than others. In law and justice, both men and women experience higher victimization rates, and imprisonment rates for men, women, and youths are appallingly higher (SCRGSP, 2005/2009). Other key indicators such as housing, education, employment, and income continue to show Indigenous Australians as a most disadvantaged group (SCRGSP, 2007). This evidence of impoverishment and disadvantage in a wealthy First World nation is shameful. Importantly, racism at individual and institutional levels continues to reproduce the impoverishment and disadvantage experienced by most Indigenous Australians (SCRGSP, 2009). Current campaigns, government policies, and community-driven interventions are promising, with the intention to close the gap on Indigenous health inequalities. The discipline of psychology can also play an important role in addressing such disadvantage.

Historical Background Like any other institution, psychology has a history of exclusion towards different cultural groups. It could be proposed that psychology, like other institutions, has been complicit in the oppression of powerless groups, particularly IndigeÂ�nous peoples in Australia (Dudgeon & Pickett, 2000) and in other countries (Howitt & Owusu-Bempah, 1994). As well as cultural boundedness, there are pervasive effects of cultural and institutionalized racism that exist within professions, disciplines, and institutions. These can take the form of the dominant group being seen as “normal” or the standard against which all else is judged, while those who are not part of the dominant group are viewed as “abnormal” or “inferior” and in need of correction (Rickwood, Dudgeon, & Gridley, 2010). All disciplines need to examine their historical and contemporary roles within the social and political structures and systems that give rise to, and perpetuate, racism and exclusion. Psychology as a discipline and profession has historically been grounded in Western culture and has been identified with the dominant European cultural tradition in Australia (see Dudgeon & Pickett, 2000; Garvey, Dudgeon, & Kearins, 2000; Rickwood, Dudgeon, & Gridley, 2010). The issues of concern include the assumption of universal applicability of psychology—that is, that truths about human behavior can be established and applied to all members of a given society without concern for cultural, historical, and political contexts. Another concern is an implicit individual orientation that underlies the discipline, in that individualism is the primary site of analysis for the profession. This approach fails to recognize the multiple ways that identity is constructed and that different people or cultural groups might construct self as part of a relational construct including family, language group, country, and spirit. Failure to examine the contributing

76


effects of culture, history, economics, politics, and the institutions that support and contribute to the development of the person presents a limited understanding of human behavior and its consequences (Glover, Dudgeon, & Huygens, 2005; Smith, 1999). We need to be critically aware that like our society, our discipline is neither value-free nor entirely objective. Australian psychology has only recently engaged with Indigenous people as partners rather than subjects (since around 1980; Garvey, Dudgeon, & Kearins, 2000). It was only in 1995 that the first Indigenous keynote speaker presented at the Australian Psychological Society annual conference. This conference also included the first-ever Aboriginal welcome to country as part of the opening ceremony. That speaker, Rob Riley, delivered an important, historic paper, in the hope that it would make a difference to the discipline. His words continue to have merit years afterwards, and the challenge remains: How many psychologists have an understanding of Aboriginal people? How many of youâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯.â•¯have an understanding of Aboriginal culture, history and contemporary issues? For many of you, this work is crucial given the social conditions and your work environment in such places as prisons and the welfare sector and where there are large numbers of Aboriginal clients. It is your responsibility to seek that knowledge and understanding now, and to ensure that it is available for future generations of psychologists, in psychological training and education programs. (Riley, 1997, p. 15–16)

Indigenous Mental Health Significant shifts have occurred since Riley’s (1997) speech. Most importantly, an Indigenous mental health movement came about that was part of a greater positive social change for Indigenous Australia in the early 1990s (Dudgeon & Pickett, 2000). Landmark reports and frameworks were developed that capture the change in how mental health was perceived by Indigenous Australians (see for example AHMAC, 2004; HREOC, 2007). One of the most significant events affecting Indigenous mental health was the Ways Forward report (Swan & Raphael, 1995). This report was developed after national consultations, a landmark national conference, and the subsequent report about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health. Indigenous politically and culturally informed constructions of health and mental health began to emerge. Changes came about in perceptions of Indigenous mental health, and rather than the “disease model” perspective there was a prioritizing of wellness, holistic health, and culturally informed and appropriate approaches. These principles should be explicitly included in psychology education as the foundation on which all health-related knowledge is acquired. These changes in perceptions toward Indigenous mental health were underpinned by key elements that included a philosophical approach of empowerment and selfdetermination in the provision of mental health services for Indigenous people.

Changing the Lens

77

In other mental health areas, professionals were beginning to engage with these changes and different conceptualizations. Psychiatrist Ernest Hunter (1997) wrote: ‘Self Determination’, ‘quality of life’, ‘well-being’â•¯.â•¯.â•¯.â•¯these are terms that have only recently entered the vocabulary of mental health professionals working in Indigenous settings. They are unfamiliar and handled with uncertainty and at times temerity. But they are also unavoidable. (p. 6) Services that worked with Indigenous people needed to ensure that mechanisms were in place for collaboration and direction from the client groups, and Indigenous people needed to be fully involved in any mental health activity for Indigenous people. Indigenous people themselves needed to direct the engagement at all levels, whether this was an interaction between a psychologist and a client, or establishing services and developing policy. Psychologists have gradually acknowledged this changed perspective, but the philosophical orientations on which these changes are based have yet to become the foundation of psychology training. It is this vocabulary of change that needs to become visible in the undergraduate and graduate education of psychologists in order for them to play a meaningful role in the shifts that must occur if Australia is to succeed in its goal of closing the gap in health equality.

The Professional Bodies In the context of psychology education in Australia, the Health Practitioner Regulation (Administrative Arrangements) National Law Act of 2008 provides that the Australian Psychology Accreditation Council (APAC) has oversight of the training and education of psychology. This means that it is APAC that sets (minimal) curriculum requirements for the course content, certain aspects of teaching practices, and staffing of psychology education, and as such is the most influential body in psychology education and training. These requirements, along with the process for accrediting the educational institutions providing psychology education, are set out in the Rules for Accreditation and Accreditation Standards for Psychology Courses (APAC, 2010). Standard 3.1 argues that a 3-year undergraduate sequence must form “adequate foundational preparation upon which later study at the advanced level is built” (APAC, 2010, p. 40). In addition, StanÂ� dard 3.1.7 under Graduate Attribute 1: Core knowledge and understanding stipulates that psychology education must include “intercultural diversity and indigenous psychology” (APAC, 2010, p. 41). This is the only specific mention of cultural diversity and Indigenous content in the graduate attributes for psychology education; it is also listed as the last of 12. Given the earlier discussions, these requirements could be much stronger. Translation from standards to teaching has been discussed in other papers; specifically in relation to the teaching of research skills it was argued that it is the interpretation of the APAC standards (previously the Australian Psychological

78


Society [APS] Guidelines) that is problematic rather than the standards per se (Breen & Darlaston-Jones, 2010; Sullivan, 2008). If the purpose of psychology education is to understand, explain, and predict human behavior, with the intention of improving well-being (APS, 2010), then arguably an understanding of the cultural, political, economic, and social contexts in which such behavior occurs must also be essential (Gergen, 1999). This perspective, in turn, strongly supports the proposition that content concerned with critical analysis of society should be included not as an elective area of study but as integral to the education and training of psychology students. An illustration of a promising development along these lines relates to the 12 National Practice Standards for the Mental Health Workforce (NPSMHW, 2002), which the government intended would ensure that mental health professionals have a baseline set of competencies. These standards are aspirational but provide a way for psychology to examine how they are reflected in the curriculum and in professional practice. The 12 standards include rights, responsibilities, safety and privacy, consumer and carer participation, awareness of diversity, knowledge of mental health problems, mental disorders, promotion and prevention, and early detection and intervention. Also listed are evidence-based assessment, treatment, relapse prevention and support services that could prevent relapse, integration and partnership, service planning, development and management, documentation and information systems, evaluation and research, and ethical practice and professional responsibilities. These standards, if incorporated into the curriculum, have the potential to shift the perspective of psychology students and graduates and therefore contribute to social change by facilitating the provision of culturally appropriate services to a diverse society. They are mentioned in the APAC Standards under Graduate Attribute 4: Values, Research and Professional Ethics as being part of the ethical framework (along with the APS code of ethics and the complementary “ethical guidelines”) for psychology education (see p. 42). Indigenous content and issues can fit under any of these 12 standards. A survey conducted by the APS showed that many aspects of the NPSMHW were covered in both undergraduate and graduate psychology education (Mathews, Katsikitis, & Littlefield, 2005). However, it is largely left to the individual educator within schools and departments of psychology as to how they might be incorporated into the psychology curriculum. In addition, this inclusion is not only relatively recent but also has occurred without the requirement for mandatory professional development for existing psychologists or psychology educators. The consequence of this is likely to be that those practitioners who already subscribe to an inclusive value base would actively seek out professional development opportunities to improve their skills, while others might not see the relevance of doing so. While the accreditation requirements are designed to ensure that this content is covered, the accreditation process may fall short on assessing the extent to which the material is covered, the philosophical orientation in which it is presented, and the understanding or knowledge of the educator delivering it. The Australian Indigenous Psychologists Association (AIPA) has developed cultural competence training for mental health professionals

Changing the Lens

79

within these principles and has led the way with a number of initiatives seeking to advance the knowledge of and respect for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture and tradition. Therefore, there is scope for the newly established Psychology Board of Australia to require all practitioners to undertake professional development in cultural competence.

Teaching Indigenous Studies in Higher Education In comparison to Australia, a recent and recommended U.S. model for the undergraduate psychology curriculum suggests that discussion of ethical issues, including matters such as race, prejudice, discrimination, and equality, should appear in all courses (Dunn et al., 2010.) Discussions about the need to include Indigenous Studies in the university curriculum have been in place for some years in Australia. The Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council (IHEAC) has taken up the issue with governments. Based on principles of respect for Indigenous people, knowledge, and culture, one of the visions of IHEAC for the Australian higher education system is to ensure that Indigenous people and their culture and knowledge are visible and valued on university campuses (Commonwealth of Australia, 2006). Most importantly, IHEAC has recognized that while Indigenous disadvantages are critical and need to be addressed, there should also be a focus on the unique positive and distinctive contributions that Indigenous people and culture make to universities. IHEAC also recommended that Indigenous cultural competence be recognized as a graduate attribute for all Australian higher education graduates (Commonwealth of Australia, 2008). An outstanding example of a discipline area including Indigenous content in the curriculum in a systemic manner is in medical education, where the Committee of Deans of Australian Medical Schools (CDAMS, 2004) Indigenous Health Curriculum Framework has been adopted to ensure that Indigenous content in the curriculum is a central issue. Here, not only are student attributes identified but equally importantly, so too are the pedagogical principles by which the students are taught. The CDAMS framework also provides a set of guidelines to assist medical schools to develop and deliver Indigenous health content in medical education, thereby ensuring the development of cultural competence in medical graduates. The framework was adopted by the Australian Medical Council in accreditation processes to ensure that Indigenous content in the curriculum is a central issue.

Teaching About Culture as Psychological Literacy For most Australian psychologists, there were few opportunities to have Indigenous studies or social justice issues included in their education experience. It has only been in recent times that books on Indigenous mental health such as Working with Indigenous Australians: A Handbook for Psychologists (Dudgeon,

80


Box 6.1 Personal Reflection: Pat Dudgeon When I was studying psychology many years ago there was very little about Indigenous issues in my courses. When I graduated I wondered whether my qualifications would be useful to the Aboriginal community at all. The discipline was extremely Eurocentric and it was difficult to see how it had any relevance to Indigenous people. I felt alienated in my undergraduate studies and was much more comfortable with anthropology, which considered other cultures. In psychology, when we tried to match up to issues such as Indigenous cognition, child development, and so on, it left us bereft. We did not fit, and there was a sense that we were somehow at fault. However, one day I read a book called Black Psychology by African American psychologists (Jones, 1972), and it was a revelation: a new world opened, showing me that there could be other paradigms in psychology. I was then fortunate to be part of the development of the different perspectives in Indigenous mental health in Australia. At this point, we realized that the issue was not about us “not fitting,” but it had been about the discipline not fitting us. Australian psychology has changed since then to now include paradigms that are relevant to Indigenous peoples. Personal Reflection: Dawn Darlaston-Jones My experience as a non-Indigenous woman means that I am faced with multiple challenges in my role as an educator and citizen in what is purported to be a multicultural country. Not only am I a non-Indigenous woman, but I am also a British migrant and therefore need to continually negotiate my position and identity in a society that continues to experience the damage caused by British colonialism. In addition, choosing to embrace an anti-racism framework in my teaching practice presents further challenges not only in terms of my position, identity, and role, but also in regard to the practicalities of how to teach within this philosophical orientation. This requires critical reflection in relation to content, assessments, and overcoming resistance from non-Indigenous students as well as the broader systemic issues of the assumptions that underpin education, including cultural imperialism and whiteness. Undergraduate psychology education failed to provide me with any foundation on which to develop a different understanding or approach in my professional life. My postgraduate studies in community psychology, however, saw me take a unit on cultural issues delivered by Associate Professor Christopher Sonn, and this became the turning point in my life, professionally and personally. This class introduced me to different ways of experiencing the world and the consequences of contributing to a system that marginalizes and oppresses members of society, not necessarily through acts of overt discrimination but by a set of assumptions and philosophies that reinforce social conventions that see certain people and groups as less than those members of the dominant society.

Changing the Lens

81

This introduction was the turning point for me and has led me on a journey of critical reflection, reading, investigation, and learning that contributed to my evolution personally and professionally. Personal Reflection: Yvonne Clark As an Aboriginal student studying psychology in the 1990s there was very little Indigenous and cultural content in my psychology courses. Although I found various aspects of the content interesting and useful, much of it didn’t fit with who I was, nor my experiences of growing up, my values, nor my way of thinking and understanding in the world. At times I found much of the content and concepts incongruent and hard to grasp. One particular psychology lecturer, who I sought out for clarification on a specific topic, informed me arrogantly that “what we have here is an indoctrination process” and if I didn’t grasp it, use the concepts, language, and information, and become fully engaged (in other words, become indoctrinated) then I would not become a “true” professional. This was upsetting, as these words and attitude rendered me and my cultural differences as insignificant. At the time the existing power imbalance between student and lecturer did not give me the confidence to challenge the lecturer; I did, however, debrief with my honors supervisor, who helped me see past the arrogance and reflect on what I wanted to do with the experience of it. I decided and made a pact to myself that I was going to stay true to myself, my identity, and my values as an Aboriginal person within this institution and not be bullied into a process and system that I was uncomfortable with. Aboriginal people have endured many years under assimilation policies that attempted to strip identities, and I was not about to let this similar process deny me my place within this system. As a consequence of not fully engaging in psychology I felt I was always on the “outer” and felt quite alone, being the only Aboriginal student. However, despite this, I succeeded. I am now a lecturer at the very same university and feel honored to be in such a position and to teach within a cultural competence framework. I provide various lectures within cross-cultural, intercultural, Indigenous psychology, and mental health subjects within the undergraduate program. I also provide some practical lectures on Indigenous social and emotional well-being in the graduate program. However, this lectureship brings many challenges in terms of how to teach a different paradigm that embraces concepts and understandings of cultural difference: anti-racism, equity, and disadvantage. I start with analyzing the broader systems in order to move from tokenism to genuine commitment and competence in Indigenous issues and mental health. There are further challenges when I encounter pockets of resistance from non-Indigenous students in embracing these different concepts. Despite these challenges, I know that among the pockets of resistance there is also growing support and willingness to embrace cultural competence, and there has never been a better time than now to nurture such growth.

82


Garvey, & Pickett, 2000), Working Together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Mental Health and Wellbeing Principles and Practices (Purdie, Dudgeon, & Walker, 2010), and other psychology texts that included Indigenous issues and chapters such as Psychology, 2nd Australian and New Zealand Edition (Burton, Westen, & Kowalski, 2009) have been available. Even now, for those who have committed to ensuring that psychological literacy in Indigenous perspectives is a part of the education they provide, it is a challenging situation at a number of levels. Not only are appropriate resources scarce, but there remains a lack of understanding at the decision-making and implementation levels that cultural competence needs to be included—which we argue should become the foundation to any practice. At the heart of this practice is a commitment to social change, a recognition that not only does the individual need to change his or her view, but that this change also needs to transfer to the broader community in terms of the social norms and assumptions that predicate interactions and belief systems (Prilleltensky & Gonick, 1996). It is in this context that education, particularly tertiary education, plays a crucial role. This includes the environment and culture of the university, the discipline content of the courses, and the interactions between the students and the students and staff. Therefore, the subject material about cultural norms and value systems needs to be reflected in the norms and values of the student; the educator, who is likely to be a member of the dominant group and who needs to share a sense of connection with those whom he or she seeks to educate; and the manner in which the classroom reflects and reinforces dominant societal positions. Establishing a climate of mutual trust and respect provides the basis for a healthy inclusive environment that maximizes learning and outcomes. However, the value of any experience depends not on the experience per se but on the struggles around the way it is interpreted and defined (Giroux, 1983, 2001); therefore, what is important is not the interaction that occurs in the classroom as a function of being a student or educator, but the interpretation of the interaction that occurs as each person struggles to negotiate new spaces and ways of thinking, and the subsequent effect this has on the individual. Students who represent the dominant group in society are often resistant to a view that positions them in a different way to that which they have been socialized to expect, and this can lead to tensions within the individual student and within the class. The key is not to position students as problematic, but rather to encourage them to explore the social constructions of other members of society and therefore by extension examine their own subject position in light of this analysis. This process of exploration means that it is not simply the content of the unit that is critical, but also the pedagogical approach that is applied to its delivery. Consequently, critical reflexivity, power, and its consequences take on particular importance. Critical reflexivity in both the student and the educator is essential in terms of understanding how each contributes to either the maintenance or challenge of the status quo; there needs to be a recognition and understanding of the role of power and how this translates in society to either privilege or disadvantage. It is this notion of power that needs to become visible within the training of

Changing the Lens

83

psychology students as well as the broader educational context. It is also the effect of the experience of exploring these issues in relation to the long-term outcome for the graduate, in essence his or her personal growth and development, and how this is played out in the broader fabric of society, that is crucial. Perhaps most importantly, an understanding of the role of whiteness in constituting society on a national and international stage, as well as the consequences of this for members of both dominant and marginalized groups, also needs to have a central role in the classroom. Students who are members of minority groups usually welcome such an approach because it is often the first time that their social position and voice has been identified, and the detrimental consequences of marginalization as a direct result of power and whiteness has been examined. Creating environments for psychology students to become literate in ethical issues and social justice is important. Perhaps even more important is the issue of the type of student who is being recruited and retained within psychology and how this affects society. Given that the underlying philosophical assumptions of higher education and in particular psychology education are ones based on Western ideals of individualism and consumerism—usually more so than on the ideals of social responsibility and social justice—students may not have any opportunity to learn other values. It is important that concepts of a just and well society are not lost in favor of a concept that emphasizes individual achievement over compassion (Apple, 1982, 2000b;, Aronowitz, 2000; Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991; Biesta, 2001; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002). This perspective of education means that five issues (Tanaka, 2002) gain greater relevance in understanding the student experience and how it relates to the educational experience and the effects on citizenship. Each issue raises a series of questions designed to facilitate the necessary critical reflection and therefore collectively provide a valuable framework for assessing each area of education and practice and their consequences. These issues are: • Voice: whether or not students are heard in the university context. Are they able to be seen as having “subject position” or are they objectified by the dominant consumer focus adopted by higher education? • Power: How do the multiple manifestations of power play out in higher education? Are these stated explicitly, therefore making them open to critique and challenge? Do we (students and educators alike) examine how power and knowledge are connected? Do we question the Eurocentric nature of knowledge that explicitly excludes minority groups? Do educators acknowledge the ways in which teaching practices reinforce the dominant perspective and so contribute to cultural hegemony? • Authenticity: Do educators and policymakers acknowledge that students are situated in their own cultural space that includes issues of social, economic, and political power? • Reflexivity: Do we as individuals (students and educators) explore our place in society and our role in constituting the taken-for-granted norms

84


that operate? Do we understand that the university is a cultural place and that we (students and educators) contribute to its creation? • Reconstitution: Are we as students, researchers, and educators able to effect change and create a learning environment conducive to the development of individual and collective well-being? The ability to explore these questions demands a conceptual and theoretical framework that allows analysis not only of the learning experience itself and how this is interpreted and made sense of by the individual student, but also of how this relates to well-being on the individual, relational, and community levels within and beyond the university context. Accepting the concept proposed by Prilleltensky and Nelson (2002) that community well-being is predicated on individual and relational well-being means that the role of the university in contributing to well-being at all levels (in the professions and society as a whole) takes on greater meaning. This is because universities can be conceptualized as communities in their own right as well as being a constituent of the broader society; therefore, the content of the psychology curriculum plays a significant role not only in the ongoing education of psychologists but also in their power to affect understanding of behaviors in a broader context (Giroux, 2001; Prilleltensky, 1997, 2003a, b). The power of the educational setting in contributing to the socialization process (Leistyna, 1999) is well recognized, and therefore the student becomes the focus of the institution and the institution is nested within the community. If the university processes and practices are beneficial to the individual, this will translate into wider benefit for the community, but the same is true if these practices are detrimental to the individual. The social justice of equitable access to education for all peoples requires an awareness of the diversity of the student population and a commitment to the creation of a pluralist university based on mutual respect between the informants (Fox & Prilleltensky, 1997; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002); therefore, it becomes imperative that the unspoken assumptions that underpin the liberal democracy of Australian society be brought into focus and challenged, and this includes issues of cultural imperialism and whiteness. In Australia, some universities do attempt to include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives and content into the degree structure in psychology. There are two broad approaches to this undertaking. The first can be conceptualized as a “stand-alone” model, which is illustrated well at the University of South Australia (UniSA). The second approach is an “embedded” model, which is the approach taken by the Bachelor of Behavioural Science at the University of Notre Dame (UNDA). At UniSA, students undertake a compulsory unit of study in their first year that examines Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture and the impact of colonization. This foundation knowledge can be expanded on with students electing to take an additional unit of study in their third year, which explores the nexus between the discipline and Indigenous peoples. Pedagogically, these units are predicated on notions of critical reflexivity that encourage students to understand their own subject position within a historical and contemporary social

Changing the Lens

85

context (Cleland, 2010). This scaffolded approach across the curriculum encourages ongoing learning and provides the opportunity for personal shifts in understanding among the students gradually over the course of their studies. This form of educational practice sets students along the path to achieving cultural competence, and prepares them to build on this competence throughout their careers. At UNDA’s Fremantle campus, the Bachelor of Behavioural Science has been conceptualized and developed with a strong commitment to including appropriate theoretical frameworks through which human behavior can be understood, and this includes an understanding of the Australian context through an anti-colonial standpoint. This approach leads to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples being reconceptualized as First Nations Peoples, and therefore psychological knowledge is presented in significantly different ways relative to dominant narratives. The concept of First Nations originated in Canada and is designed to recognize the sovereignty of Canadian Aboriginal populations other than Inuit and Métis. Unlike the Canadian context, the notion of sovereignty has no legal standing in Australia. However, applying this philosophical position establishes a foundation of respect toward Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and encourages a change of focus in subsequent discussions and analysis of social interactions. In every unit of the degree program at UNDA there is an emphasis on critical reflexivity, concepts of power, and understanding the role of whiteness in constituting society (Apple, 2000a, b; Prilleltensky, 1989; Rappaport, 1984, 2000; Tanaka, 2003; Wink, 1997). Pedagogical practices are founded on principles that contextualize the student within a specific social, cultural, historical, political, and economic space and examine the relationship between power and persons within that space (Freire, 1970, 1998, 1999). Once again knowledge is scaffolded to provide students with the opportunity to build their understanding over time and in relation to the range of content knowledge contained in the degree. Students can also undertake a unit that comprises a 4-week immersion in a remote Aboriginal community as part of the Gelganyem Youth and Community Wellbeing Programme (Morgan & Drew, 2010). This initiative is a partnership between the university and the Gelganyem Trust, representing seven Aboriginal Traditional Owner family groups in East Kimberley (Northwestern Australia). Students travel with a staff member and are engaged in a range of activities from the delivery of out-of-school programs, helping with breakfast club, developing grant applications, and other community needs as identified by the community. Students are oriented prior to engaging with community by completing a campus preparation unit on Indigenous studies and critical whiteness. Critical to the success of this program is the fact that it is initiated by and on behalf of the Aboriginal Traditional Owners and therefore it has community control. The importance of building and maintaining relationships with community members, and for the university team members to see their role as working for or with the community in respectful partnership, is a key element of the learning outcomes from this experience and reflects the foundation principles of the degree. Graduates of Behavioural Science emerge with an understanding of and the ability to critique existing discourses and how these create and maintain privilege and disadvantage.

86


While each of these different approaches to incorporating Indigenous content into the curriculum has strengths and deficits, both models provide students with the essential knowledge components for them to engage critically with their professional roles and identity within contemporary society and therefore to work towards social change. Perhaps the greatest challenge in developing an embedded model such as the one at UNDA is the capacity of academic staff to teach within this framework. As mentioned previously, undergraduate and graduate training in psychology usually does not readily provide this knowledge, and so educators need to teach themselves not only in the content knowledge but also in the pedagogical approaches to teach effectively in a social justice framework. The positive consequence of this approach, however, is that course content is obtained from different disciplines, which not only increases transdisciplinary engagements but also situates psychological knowledge and practice in a more holistic manner. This in turn ensures that psychology graduates are better able to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse population, and to increase the applicability of psychology and psychologists to the complexities of the social context. Unfortunately, developing staff with this knowledge background can be difficult, and the creation of courses of study predicated on such philosophical foundations is often tied to individual staff, making succession planning another consideration. The 2010 symposium at the International Conference of Psychology Education (ICOPE) in Sydney identified the theoretical and practical issues related to incorporating Indigenous voices, knowledge, culture, and history into the training of psychology students to effect social change. Emerging from this symposium is an initiative to develop strategies to promote change in three key areas: 1. To “Indigenise” the curriculum in psychology and other disciplines 2. To increase the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students enrolled in psychology 3. To increase opportunities for psychologists to undertake cultural compeÂ� tence education.

Conclusions We addressed the need for psychologists and psychology education to become psychologically literate with respect to cultural understandings. Our perspective incorporates a social justice standpoint that recognizes the impacts of history and particularly power imbalances that result in groups remaining marginalized and disempowered. Undergraduate students, whether or not they become professional psychologists, need to be culturally competent to fully participate in employment and social settings that are becoming increasingly globalized, and in particular to optimize their capacity to work with different cultural groups. This perspective requires a philosophical shift in the way that psychology education and training is conceptualized so that cultural competence becomes the lens through which all knowledge is assessed and understood. Consequently, not only is the content of

Changing the Lens

87

psychology education important, but so too is the manner in which it is taught. These two parallel imperatives are essential if psychology, as a discipline, and psychologists, as professionals, are to contribute in a meaningful way to the social change agenda.

References Apple, M. (1982). Cultural and economic reproduction in education. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Apple, M. (1996). Cultural politics and education. New York: Teachers College Press. Apple, M. (2000a). Can critical pedagogies interrupt rightist policies? Educational Theory, 50, 229–254. Apple, M. (2000b). Official knowledge. New York: Routledge. Aronowitz, S. (2000). The knowledge factory. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Aronowitz, S., & Giroux, H. (1991). Postmodern education: politics, culture, and social criticism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey, 2004–2005. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council (AHMAC) (2004). The National Strategic Framework for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Peoples Mental Health and Social and Emotional Wellbeing, 2004–2009. Canberra: AHMAC. Australian Psychology Accreditation Council (2010). Rules for accreditation and accredita tion standards for psychology courses. Melbourne: APAC. Retrieved Aug. 22, 2010, from http://www.apac.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/APAC_Rules_for%20_Accreditation_ and_Accreditation_Standards_for%20_Psychology_Courses_Ver_10_June_2010.pdf. Australian Psychological Society Website (2010). http://www.psychology.org.au/AboutUs/ Biesta, G. (2001). How difficult should education be? Educational Theory, 51, 385–401. Breen, L., & Darlaston-Jones, D. (2010). Moving beyond the enduring dominance of positivism in psychological research: an Australian perspective. Australian Psychologist, 45(1), 67–76. Burton, L., Westen, D., & Kowalski, R. (2009). Psychology, 2nd Australian and New Zealand edition. Australia: John Wiley & Sons. Cleland, A. (2010). Cultural competency development: responding to resistance in preparing human service graduates to work effectively with Indigenous Australian people. Journal of Australian Indigenous Studies, 13(3&4), 76–88. Commonwealth Department of Health and Aging, (2002). National Practice Standards for the Mental Health Workforce. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Health and Aging. Committee of Deans of Australian Medical Schools. (2004). Indigenous Health Curric ulum Framework. Melbourne: VicHealth Koori Health Research and Community Development Unit, University of Melbourne. Commonwealth of Australia. Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council. (2006). Improving indigenous outcomes and enhancing indigenous culture and knowledge in Australian higher education report. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Commonwealth of Australia. Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council. (2008). Ngapartji Ngapartji–Yerra: Stronger Futures. Report of the 3rd Annual IHEAC ConÂ�ference. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

88


Dalton, J., Elias, M., & Wandesman, A. (2007). Community psychology: linking Â�individuals and communities (2nd ed.). Australia: Thomson. Dudgeon, P., Wright, M., Paradies, Y., Garvey, D., & Walker, I. (2010). The social, cultural and historical context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. In N. Purdie, P. Dudgeon, & R, Walker (Eds.), Working together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health and wellbeing principles practices (pp. 25–42). Canberra: ACER. Dudgeon, P. L., Garvey, D., & Pickett, H. (Eds.). (2000). Working with Indigenous Australians: a handbook for psychologists. Perth: Gunada Press. Dudgeon, P. L., & Pickett, H. (2000). Psychology and reconciliation: Australian perspectives. Australian Psychologist, 35(2), 82–87. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., et al, (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Fox, D. (2000). The critical psychology project: transforming society and transforming psychology. In T. Sloan (Ed.), Critical psychology: voices for change. New York: St Martin’s Press. Fox, D., & Prilleltensky, I. (1997). Introducing critical psychology: values, assumptions, and status quo. In D. Fox & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Critical psychology: an introduction (pp. 3–20). London: Sage Publications. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum. Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: ethics, democracy, and civil courage. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc. Freire, P. (1999). Making history and unveiling oppression. Dulwich Centre Journal, 3, 37–39. Garvey D., Dudgeon, P., & Kearins, J. (2000). Australian psychology has black history. In P. Dudgeon, D. Garvey, & H. Pickett (Eds.), Working with Indigenous Australians: a handbook for psychologists (pp. 231–248). Perth: Gunada Press. Gergen, K. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London: Sage. Giroux, H. (1983). Theory and resistance in education: a pedagogy for the opposition. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey Publishers Inc. Giroux, H. (2001). Pedagogy of the depressed: beyond the new politics of cynicism. College Literature, 28(3), 1–32. Glover, M., Dudgeon, P., & Huygens, I. (2005). Colonization and racism. In G. Nelson & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Community psychology: in pursuit of well-being (pp. 330–347). New York: Palgrave and Macmillan. Howwitt, D., & Owusu-Bemph, J. (1994). The racism of psychology: time for a change. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) (2007). Close the gap: national Indigenous health equality targets. Outcomes from the National Indigenous Health Equality Summit. Sydney: HREOC. Hunter, E. (1997). Double talk: changing and conflicting constructions of Indigenous mental health. Paper presented to the National Conference on Mental Health Services, Policy and Law Reform into the Twenty-First Century. University of Newcastle, Feb. 14, 1997. Jones, R. (Ed.). (1972). Black psychology. New York: Harper & Row. Kelly, K., Dudgeon, P., Gee, G. & Glaskin. (2009). Living on the edge: social and emotional wellbeing and risk and protective factors for serios psychological distress

Changing the Lens

89

among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Discussion paper series: No 10. Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health. Leistyna, P. (1999). Presence of mind: education and the politics of deception. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Mathews, R., Katsikitis, M., & Littlefield, L. (2005). An evaluation of education and training in the National Practice Standards for the Mental Health Workforce within Australian university psychology programs. Inpsych. June 2005. Available at: http:// www.psychology.org.au/publications/inpsych/evaluation/ McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, J. R., Jeffrey, D., Holmes, J. E., et al. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate educa tion in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Morgan, M., & Drew, N. (2010). Principled engagement: Gelganyem youth and com munity well being program. In N. Purdie, P. Dudgeon, & R. Walker (Eds.), Working together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health and wellbeing principles and practice. Canberra: Department of Health & Aging. National Centre for Cultural Competence (NCCC) (2006). Conceptual frameworks/ models, guiding values, and principles. Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Child Development Center. Nelson, G., & Prilleltensky, I. (Eds) (2010). Community Psychology: In pursuit of libera tion and well-being (2nd Ed). Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Prilleltensky, I. (1989). Psychology and the status quo. American Psychologist, 44, 795–802. Prilleltensky, I. (1997). Values, assumptions, and practices: assessing the moral implications of psychological discourse and action. American Psychologist, 52, 517–535. Prilleltensky, I. (2003a). The role of power in wellness, oppression, and liberation: the promise of psychopolitical validity. Retrieved from http://members.optushome.com. au/psydeas/power.htm. Prilleltensky, I. (2003b). Understanding, resisting, and overcoming oppression: toward psychopolitical validity. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 195–201. Prilleltensky, I., & Fox, D. (1997). Introducing critical psychology: values, assumptions, and the status quo. In D. Fox & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Critical psychology: an introduc tion. (pp.3–20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Prilleltensky, I., & Gonick, L. (1996). Politics change, oppression remains: on the psychology and politics of oppression. Political Psychology, 17, 127–147. Prilleltensky, I., & Nelson, G. (2002). Doing psychology critically: making a difference in diverse settings. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Purdie, N., Dudgeon, P., & Walker, R. (Eds.). (2010). Working together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health and wellbeing principles and practices. Canberra: Australian Council for Education Research. Rappaport, J. (1984). Studies in empowerment: introduction to the issue. Prevention in Human Services, 5, 1–7. Rappaport, J. (2000). Community narratives: tales of terror and joy. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 1–24. Rickwood, D., Dudgeon, P., & Gridley, H., (2010). A history of psychology in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health. In N. Purdie, P. Dudgeon, & R. Walker

90


(Eds.), Working together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health and well being principles and practices (pp. 13–24). Canberra: Australian Council for Education Research. Riley, R. (1997). From exclusion to negotiation: the role of psychology in Aboriginal social justice. Discussion Paper. Perth, Curtin Indigenous Research centre. Smith, L. (1999). Decolonising methodologies: research and Indigenous peoples. Dunedin: University of Otago Press. Sullivan, G. B. (2008). What is the status of theoretical psychology in Australia and New Zealand? An investigation of contemporary teaching and research issues. Australian Psychologist, 43, 61–73. Steering Committee for the Review of Government Services Provision. (2005/9). Overcoming Indigenous disadvantage: key indicators 2005/7. Canberra: Productivity Commission, Commonwealth of Australia. Swan, P., & Raphael, B. (1995). “Ways forward”: national consultancy report on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Australian Government Publishing Services. Tanaka, G. (2002). Higher education’s self-reflexive turn: toward an intercultural theory of student development. Journal of Higher Education, 73, 263–296. Tanaka, G. (2003). The intercultural campus: transcending culture and power in American higher education. New York: Peter Lang. Watson, I., Buchanan, J., Campbell, I., & Briggs, C. (2003). Fragmented futures: new challenges in working life. Sydney: Federation Press. Wink, J. (1997). Critical pedagogy: notes from the real world. New York: Longman.

7 Introductory Psychology and Psychological Literacy L o r e ll e J . B u r t o n a n d K a t h i e J . M

c

Donald

T

he world of higher education has changed rapidly in recent years. For example, large-scale reviews such as the Bradley Report (Bradley, Noonan, Nugent, & Scales, 2008) have identified key challenges that the sector faces in Australia, and have subsequently initiated structural reform. The way universities teach undergraduate students and the graduate outcomes that they target are also changing (Cranney et al., 2009). This evolution poses both challenges and opportunities for the discipline and profession of psychology. As psychology educators, we have to adapt and embrace the challenge of change. We cannot be left behind while a new model of tertiary education takes off. At the same time, we have the chance to be at the forefront of that change, and lead the ongoing evolution of tertiary education. One key opportunity that we have is to champion the benefits for students in developing “psychological literacy” not just for those enrolled in psychology, but as a building block to success for all commencing tertiary students. This chapter will examine the broader challenges facing the higher education sector, the way psychology is taught, the particular challenges that first-year students face, and the concept of developing “psychologically literate citizens.”

Higher Education in Australia The Bradley Report (Bradley et al., 2008) has provided a checkpoint for tertiary education in Australia. The report puts into focus the state of the national higher education sector in comparison to that of similar countries, and its findings have directed us down a challenging path. The report found international consensus that “the reach, quality and performance of a nation’s higher education system would be key determinants of its economic and social progress” (Bradley et al., 2008, p. xi); that is, Australia’s continued development will be underpinned by the strength of our tertiary sector. It is concerning, then, that the Bradley Report also found that Australia lagged behind countries in some educational measures, sitting below the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

92

T h e P s y c h o l o g ica l ly Literate C iti z en

average in terms of graduates from tertiary education. As a result, the report has recommended challenging targets to help redress that gap, particularly increasing (a) the overall percentage of the population having at least a bachelor’s degree qualification, and (b) the proportion of university students from previously underrepresented groups. Achieving those targets presents multifaceted and complex problems. How do educators, administrators, and/or faculty members ensure that underrepresented groups aspire to, enroll in, and complete higher education studies? How will higher education keep regional universities sustainable, so that underrepresented rural populations have access to the sector? Many of these outcomes require wider social or systemic change. The current federal government intends to tackle the challenge by implementing a new national management system. In the psychology profession, recent health practitioner reforms in Australia have created additional structural changes for learning and teaching. From July 1, 2010, the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act of 2009 became the legislative framework under which psychologists, and nine other health professions, operate. The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency will support the health practitioner management in Australia via 10 health professional boards. For psychologists, this body is the Psychology Board of Australia, which reviews and accepts accreditation of tertiary psychology programs made by a separate accreditation body, the Australian Psychology Accreditation Council, which has had this role since its formation in 2003 (Australia Psychology Accreditation Council, 2009). So, the tertiary sector in Australia (and the psychology profession in particular) faces significant change in coming years as a result of the structural and aspirational reforms now on the table. What does this mean for learning and teaching in the tertiary sector, and for learning and teaching in psychology in particular?

Psychological Literacy and the First-Year Student Experience At a time when increasing emphasis is rightly being placed on teaching and learning in universities around Australia, it is important for the discipline of psychology to examine its own teaching environment, particularly at first-year level. The study of psychology is concerned with understanding why people act and think as they do, and how people differ. Psychology education is based on the scientistpractitioner model, which provides a rigor that some other disciplines lack. Psychology uses scientifically validated principles, which are then applied to address practical issues and problems. Typically, first-year psychology courses are designed to provide students with an understanding of the major concepts, methods, and theoretical perspectives in psychology; to learn about the research process; and to build skills in writing essays and research reports in standard format. The major concepts of the main fields, including biological psychology, memory,

Introductory Psychology and Psychological Literacy

93

motivation and emotion, learning, intelligence, developmental psychology, personality, cross-cultural psychology, psychological disorders, therapy, health, and social psychology, are introduced. An emerging concept in psychology education, which takes a broader view of the outcomes from first-year studies, is that of psychological literacy. Being psychologically literate means not just understanding those basic psychological principles, but also recognizing how they influence the world around you. A psychologically literate person is a critical and ethical thinker, someone who welcomes intellectual exchanges dealing with questions or problems linked with behavior, and who is insightful and reflective about his or her own and others’ actions (Dunn, 2009). For many people, the concept of “psychology” is not something they associate with everyday life. If they consider the concept at all, it is probably thought of in the context of the stereotypical psychoanalyst’s couch. But psychological literacy is about recognizing that all human behavior is influenced by our mental processes, and a better understanding of that fact helps people not just in their studies but in their daily lives. In doing so, people start to understand that what happens in the world around us—both good and bad—is almost invariably a result of human thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. The values, knowledge, and skills acquired from undergraduate psychology education can inspire people to take leadership in solving human problems in local and global contexts. Psychological literacy means an ability to combine self-awareness, fundamental scientific principles about human behavior, and practical application of that knowledge to address key human issues. In summary, McGovern and colleagues (2010) outlined that psychological literacy involves the following abilities: • • • • • • • • •

Understanding the basic concepts and principles of psychology Understanding scientific research practices Having problem-solving skills Applying psychological principles to personal, social, or organizational problems Acting ethically Thinking critically Communicating well in many different contexts Having cultural competence and respecting diversity Having self-awareness and other-awareness and understanding.

There is a particular benefit to first-year tertiary students if they develop their psychological literacy (Cranney, Morris, Spehar, & Scoufis, 2008). The difficulties of transitioning to academic life is a key reason that psychological literacy should not just be a core graduate outcome at the completion of a psychology undergraduate course, but a process that starts immediately as students begin their first classes. The first-year transition is a major hurdle for many students. Attrition rates are estimated to be approximately 20% during the first year, almost double that of the second year (Marks, 2007). The recently published First Year Experience

94


Report (James, Kraus, & Jennings, 2010) presented other important pre-Bradley Report (Bradley et al., 2008) findings that deserve consideration: • Both online delivery and hours spent studying online are increasing, particularly among rural and low-socioeconomic status students. • On-campus course contact and private study hours are declining. Coupled with increasing work hours, this needs to be carefully monitored so that engagement and learning do not also decline. • Students’ sense of belonging and their perception that they are known by their lecturers is declining. • Students are more likely to study together. • Longer paid work hours are associated with lower grades and increased likelihood of deferral, as are lack of social support, lack of parental understanding, and lack of preparation for university. • Although the quality of teaching is generally perceived to be good, one third of students do not think that they receive helpful feedback about their progress. • Rural students are more critical of the quality of teaching, while matureaged and international students are most positive about it (and this is aligned with clarity of purpose). What these findings demonstrate is that first-year students face a unique set of challenges, and significant adjustments are often required to achieve academic success (Keup, 2006; Weisenberg & Stacey, 2005). A student’s first year at university is usually a period of becoming accustomed to a new way of life and a new way of learning. Many first-year students enter university with high expectations for success yet are often unprepared for the demands of academic life. They subsequently experience feelings of dissatisfaction, low levels of engagement, and declines in academic achievement (Keup, 2006). As noted in the James et al. (2010) report, many have to work long hours at part-time jobs to earn enough income to support themselves. A large number also come directly from a secondary school system where their learning is managed, directed, and supervised more strictly. They may consequently struggle with the need to be self-directed and self-managed learners at university. Also, first-year students increasingly come from widely different cultural backgrounds, so not only do they have different expectations and experiences, they must also learn to mix and communicate with each other as well. That strangeness and unfamiliarity can create uncertainty and angst. We argue that a principal aim of first-year psychology should be to lay the foundation for students to become successful lifelong learners. Importantly, the same core skills needed to develop psychological literacy are also the skills that will give students a better chance of achieving academic success generally. In particular, the skills of critical thinking and problem solving are extremely important not just for students to employ as they continue their academic journey in subsequent years, but also to develop the self-awareness and resilience needed to cope with the challenges of the first-year transition. Much of the study in the course of the 4 years of


95

an undergraduate psychology degree is aimed at teaching students to think like a professional psychologist. This requires a thorough understanding of how people learn, how they evaluate information, and how they use it. Students also need to be aware of the cognitive processes that they bring with them that might have an impact on their critical-thinking and problem-solving skills. To be a good psychologist, you have to be able to communicate well in a wide range of settings. You need to be able to speak and write clearly, and you need to understand how communication breakdowns can occur. Psychology courses can and should address communication as a key skill for all aspects of life. Students also come to higher education with widely different degrees of understanding about the nature of human behavior, including their own. This is a crucial consideration. Many students assert an unsophisticated commonsense psychology, based on popular culture and unscientific attitudes and stances (Cranney, 2008). For first-year students to start moving toward psychological literacy, they must first start confronting their own beliefs and critically examining them. The ability to develop critical-thinking skills is crucial here. Critical thinking is a skill that has wide applications in many areas of life, but it is particularly important for those attempting academic research. It means carefully examining and analyzing evidence to assess its validity and worth, probing beneath the surface to weigh alternative views and search for other explanations (Burton, 2010). Without this skill, succeeding in higher education is extremely difficult (for perspectives on teaching critical thinking in psychology, see Dunn, Halonen, & Smith, 2008; Halpern & Butler, Chapter 3 in this volume). The ability to think critically underpins all research. However, it is also a vital component of psychological literacy because of the contribution that it can make to an individual’s own self-awareness. People come to tertiary education with plenty of “baggage”—assumptions, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that they have developed unconsciously and that may be based on incomplete information or cultural stereotypes. The skills of critical thinking help students to unpack that baggage and begin to better understand how their personal beliefs have developed and whether or not their assumptions have validity. Getting students to start developing this skill from the first year not only sets them on the path to psychological literacy early but also helps students better adjust to the challenges of coping with people from divergent backgrounds and cultures in the university environment. Similarly, encouraging students to start developing the skill of problem solving at the first-year level contributes to psychological literacy and has more immediate benefits in assisting them to cope with problems confronting their personal situations. Life in general throws up a never-ending stream of problems or challenges that have to be addressed. For first-year students, those problems can be particularly confronting. Many students, including those fresh from the relative safety of a cocooned school environment, find themselves thrust into a world that demands answers from them. Where will I study? How can I afford to go to university? What course should I major in? How can I find the time to work and study? How can I improve my grades? The ability to apply problem-solving strategies is a trait of the psychologically literate citizen, but could also be the difference between

96


surviving the difficulties of the first-year adjustment and failing to cope with that burden. It is important that first-year educators encourage students to become resilient problem solvers and to start questioning the world around them with a critical eye. Psychological literacy development through psychology courses would be an appropriate tool for this. What is important from a teaching perspective is that students are introduced to the practical application of these skills, focusing on their own situations, right from the start of their studies. Cranney (2008) stated that gaining a reasonable amount of literacy is not enough; rather, to develop proper psychological literacy, students need to focus on understanding themselves and to accompany their insight with changes to their behavior. Extending upon this thinking, students should be encouraged to start applying key concepts by challenging their own prejudices and seeing how those concepts resonate with their personal experiences. Knowledge of the principles of psychology is made more meaningful if students are given opportunities to apply those principles to better understand themselves, and in so doing, gain skills that can be transferred to further academic studies and to life in general (Cranney, 2008). Thus, encouraging these skills among first-year students appears certain to grow in importance in coming years as the tertiary education sector continues to evolve.

Psychology and the Concept of the Global Citizen Why is the concept of psychological literacy garnering such increasing attention? A key reason is the potential for wider society if psychological literacy is developed in its citizens. The notion of the psychologically literate citizen is similar to the concept of the “global citizen” that universities worldwide are aspiring to develop in their graduates. Psychologically literate citizens learn to lead by intentionally and courageously using their psychological literacy for sustained community benefit (Cranney, 2008). Given this notion, there are increasing calls for the development of psychoÂ� logical literacy to become a primary aim of undergraduate psychology education (McGovern et al., 2010). Cranney (2008) took this ideal one step further and argued that the development of psychological literacy offers so much that the time has come to make first-year psychology compulsory for all tertiary students. There are benefits both for individual students and for wider society in this approach. For the students themselves, becoming more literate means developing not only greater self-awareness of their own limitations and behaviors, but also greater respect for diversity, a greater understanding of critical thinking and problem solving, and a greater understanding of basic scientific principles (McGovern et al., 2010). This provides an excellent platform for them to cope with the difficulties of adjusting to university life in the difficult first-year transition. It also provides a better platform on which they can build academic success, having gained an excellent foundation in understanding what drives themselves and others.


97

Cranney and colleagues (2009) argued that introductory psychology should be compulsory for all students because a key outcome of such courses is that students understand that many of their personal, implicit theories of human behavior are flawed. By providing structured learning opportunities through which students experience challenges to their own beliefs, they also become more questioning about other aspects of their thinking, and thus kick-start their journey to a state where they seek out and weigh evidence carefully before coming to conclusions. In this way, introductory psychology courses become the fertile soil for developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills essential for academic success in higher education. For wider society the benefits are the creation of a larger group of potential future leaders of the community who have the psychological literacy to tackle challenges that are important to the human condition (Cranney et al., 2009). Psychologically literate students are expected to demonstrate citizenship, a characteristic woven into the fabric of healthy community life and celebrated in historical, multicultural, sacred, and secular texts (Dahlsgaard, Peterson, & Seligman, 2005). Beyond universities, the shift towards psychological literacy is reflected in national and international policies, procedures, and standards. For example, in Australia, on Jan. 28, 2010, the commonwealth government released a new social inclusion strategy (Australian Social Inclusion Board, 2010; Commonwealth of Australia, 2009). This strategy aims to create a stronger, fairer Australia by breaking cycles of disadvantage and creating “the opportunities and resources that every Australian needs to participate in the economy and community life” (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009, p. 64). The development of psychological literacy shapes as a key resource in achieving these strategies. By encouraging a greater proportion of our population to develop psychological literacy—to become what universities describe as the “global citizen”—we may be able to help reduce stereotypes and prejudices that currently exist in our society. What, then, are the learning and teaching implications if first-year psychology courses become compulsory for all tertiary students? One of the main issues is whether course content would be best delivered through stand-alone psychology courses or integrated into other non-psychology courses and/or programs. While full psychological undergraduate program completion would undoubtedly contribute most to the goal of developing psychologically literate citizens, transfer of learning would be further enhanced if other disciplines embedded first-year psychology courses into their programs. If psychology undergraduate courses are taught across disciplines with the goal of creating psychologically literate citizens, a second issue centers on the course content. If the overarching outcome of these courses is to develop psychologically literate citizens, then to facilitate this with possibly large numbers of non-psychology students, some minor content adjustments may be necessary to ensure that transfer of learning occurs. These minor changes would involve, for example, including a wide variety of applications of learning in the examples and assignments for these courses. Addressing these course delivery and content issues together would mean that psychological learning would not be kept separate from the main area of study, and that transfer of learning into practice would be more likely to occur. In essence,

98


this means that the applied notion of being a psychologically literate citizen would more likely eventuate. As the concept of psychological literacy has emerged from a bottom-up approach, it represents a culmination of theory and research on what constitutes appropriate learning outcomes. However, what is less well understood is how psychological literacy develops. It is important for the learning and teaching of psychological literacy that the development of this concept be empirically researched so that it is better understood. The ongoing challenge for educators is to research and identify the best ways to help students develop this capability. Different pedagogies might suit different aspects of psychological literacy. For example, the aspect of psychological literacy that involves demonstrating a “well-defined vocabulary and basic knowledge of the critical subject matter of psychology” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 5) could be taught using a combination of formal and structured discussions, including lectures and tutorials, and the learning outcomes assessed using multi-choice examinations that measure such content knowledge. In contrast, the aspect of psychological literacy that involves “recognizing, understanding, and fostering respect for diversity” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 6) could be taught less formally via video-based narratives or role playing; the learning outcomes could be assessed using critical self-reflections in learning journals. The concept of psychological literacy is dynamic, and so the challenge for all educators is to keep abreast of conceptual changes as new research emerges. If psychological literacy does become a universal outcome across disciplines, educators will need to integrate this empirical evidence base into course strucÂ� ture, assessment, and delivery. Ideally, an individual student’s development of psychological literacy would be evaluated over the course of the program via multiple methods (e.g., self-reports, observations, and examinations) and using multiÂ�ple informants, including self, educator, and peer. This would enable the multiple dimensions of psychological literacy (including cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions) to be captured. Students’ ability to apply this knowledge to key human issues would also need to be assessed over time. For example, Dominic Massaro of the University of California (see http://mambo.ucsc.edu/ psl/surv2007.html) has developed a self-report measure that provides promise for measuring various aspects of psychological literacy as defined by McGovern and coworkers (2010). Psychological literacy would also potentially provide an overarching outcome for educator self-development. In this way educators could model to their students what it means to be psychologically literate. For example, the aspect of psychological literacy that involves “being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behavior and mental processes” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 6), would remind educators of their own ongoing lifelong learning and encourage them to be innovative, flexible, and responsive in their teaching strategies. The dynamic paradigm within which higher education is offered is one of increasing globalization, technological advancement, evidence-based practice, and information proliferation. Most universities espouse internationalization,


99

equity, social inclusion, ethics, diversity, and critical enquiry in their learning and teaching strategies. The fact that new national targets for higher education have been set, and the fact that the concept of psychological literacy has concurrently emerged, need to be taken beyond coincidence. The challenge of meeting the new national targets, with increased numbers of students from previously underrepresented groups, can be facilitated by incorporating a strategic university goal to develop psychologically literate citizens, ideally through compulsory psychology undergraduate course completion across disciplines. The potential, if universities make this shift, goes beyond meeting national targets, however. Indeed, the university that strives for an overarching outcome of producing psychologically literate citizens across disciplines would be upholding social and ethical responsibilities for the global community by ensuring equality through social inclusion. Undoubtedly, the response and management of the task of developing psychologically literate citizens would vary from one higher education institution to another. Naturally, within higher education institutions, the importance of psychological literacy is much more likely to be recognized if there are multiple levels advocating and enforcing its development. However, even though psychological literacy may eventually assume this position, it does not mean that it will actually be developed in practice. It is the ongoing challenge of those committed to quality learning and teaching to ensure transfer of learning that adds value to the global community.

Developing Psychologically Literate Students in the First-Year of University or College: An Exemplar Each student arrives at university or college with learning preferences that have been developed over many years, rooted in his or her culture, family background, and prior educational experiences (Burton, Taylor, Dowling, & Lawrence, 2009). Similarly, teachers also bring values and beliefs to the teaching environment based on their own cultural backgrounds and world views. The reciprocal process of adjusting to these differences is the first step in developing psychological literacy. So, there is no better time to start students on this path than from the moment they step on campus to begin their first-year studies, and no better place than in an introductory psychology course. A good place for first-year educators to start this process, and also to role-model psychological literacy, is to be aware of the diversity of our student cohorts, and to adapt our own teaching methods to cater for that diversity. We need to consciously consider how to accommodate those differences in learning approaches in course materials and assessment. One technique is to have students set their own learning goals and to self-reflect at the start of the semester. When students draw on personal experiences they can better establish a link between theory and practice and become more independent in their approaches to learning. The next step is to actually teach in a way that embodies this inclusive philosophy, so students can

100


engage with the material in a way that fits their learning needs and optimizes their chances of success. The learning experience can be enhanced further by including material that effectively places its theoretical constructs within students’ cultural and academic experience. What this means is that first-year educators need to look beyond just introducing students to key topics in the literature of psychology. We need to design courses that require students to start confronting their own beliefs, assumptions, and attitudes, and to consider how that affects their own behavior. Students need to start actively applying the concepts they are learning about by reflecting on their behavior and also the behavior of others, rather than simply learning the theory. Developing critical-thinking skills and problem-solving skills in the first year will not only help students to complete their studies but will also enable them to make greater sense of the world around them. Contemporary educational theory recognizes the value of social interaction to learning, and so techniques that open up avenues of two-way interaction between lecturers and students are also helpful. Discussion forums provide opportunities for students to interact in peer groups, to share and develop knowledge. They also contribute to the development of psychological literacy by exposing students to perspectives that may differ from their own and encouraging them to start critically examining those differences. Using online discussion groups can be a useful way to initiate this process and a safe way to achieve interactivity. This discussion can be asynchronous, with comments posted and staying on a discussion board for other students to see and respond to. This format encourages students who are less confident about their oral skills to participate in the learning process because it allows more time for reflective thinking. Early interaction between all students in a “safe learning environment” can achieve what Lee and Fradd (1996) described as cultural congruence: “a way to promote students’ attention and engagement and develop shared understanding and respect” (p. 74). Cross-cultural psychology is a relatively new area of study, previously almost the exclusive arena of anthropologists and sociologists. Only in the past 50 or so years, and particularly the past 15 years, has psychology as a discipline placed a greater priority on both the similarities and differences in behavior and emotions among people as a function of varying cultural backgrounds. Psychology has recently had to do some “catching up” in the sense that many longstanding theories and approaches have often been culturally insensitive, generalizing to people as a whole when, in fact, they were tested or developed within only one or very few cultural groups. The generalizability, or question of universality, of these theories and approaches remains a major focus of study today. Developing respect for cultural diversity and an appreciation of how people’s cultural background influences their behavior is an important component of psychological literacy. This specific goal is indeed the goal of a first-year cross-cultural and Indigenous psychology course currently offered at the University of Southern Queensland. The course, which uses the type of online asynchronous discussion group outlined above, explores the relationships between cultural variables and human emotions and behavior. It raises students’ awareness and sensitivity to the


101

impact that these variables have on perception and cognition, social functioning and development, communication, personality, mental health, and other specific fields of the discipline of psychology. In doing so, students begin to explore the assumptions and values they have that affect the manner in which they approach others and the world at large. The course thus provides a foundation for further study in psychology with an increased understanding of the broad impact of cultural factors. The overarching goal of the course is to influence students’ personal development, inspiring greater tolerance and respect for, as well as involvement within, the increasingly multicultural society in which we live. The cross-cultural and Indigenous psychology course teaches students about the shared rules that govern our behavior in daily life. It explores the similarities and differences in behavior across different societies or cultures and respects the right of people to have different beliefs, customs, and aspirations. The content challenges students on many levels, particularly in terms of their assumptions and stereotypes about people of different cultural backgrounds. To help students become more culturally aware, the first assignment requires them to present a diagram of their cultural background and to write a brief explanation of the various cultural influences that have helped to shape their personal identities. They are encouraged to share their cultural diagrams with their peers via the course Web-based learning management system, as a means of initiating discussions in their small groups of about 10 classmates. The students are required to participate in the online discussion forum and to regularly interact with each other throughout the semester, discussing set topics each week, exploring the role of culture in shaping different aspects of behavior. They debate and discuss issues from different cultural perspectives, identifying the role of culture in the development of their personal biases and learning to respect differences of opinion. Towards the end of the semester, the students are required to write a reflective essay, exploring their individual cultural identity in the context of these various interactions and discussing both implicit (i.e, personal) and explicit (i.e., scientific) theories to explain their personal learning experiences. The discussions largely focus on their reflections about and reactions to the course materials. However, discussions can go much wider with regard to content. It is hoped that each student will be able to grow on both a personal and professional level with regard to self-awareness of cultural issues via this exercise. It is also expected that a greater understanding and awareness of cultural diversity and the impact that culture has on how we think, feel, and behave will result. Student feedback to date has indicated that while students rate the assignments as challenging, at the end of the course they are able to reflect on their learning and are often pleased when they realize how much they have learned. Comments from staff who teach subsequent courses have indicated that the foundation courses help to equip students with the necessary reflective and critical-thinking skills they need for success. Comments from students also attest to the extent to which they begin moving toward psychological literacy. One said: “To be honest, I found myself doing quite a bit of self-reflection while participating in the online discussions. Some of the issues were rather thought-provoking, and it helped me evaluate

102


and reflect on my own cultural biases.” Another commented: “Focussing on crosscultural psychology helped to develop understanding of myself and of others.”

Conclusion The higher education environment in Australia is experiencing changes that will make the development of psychological literacy an even more important attribute for students to develop in coming years. In the future, students will come from an even wider range of backgrounds, and the first-year transition will pose an even more difficult challenge. Students will face continued struggles to balance parttime work and studies; the need to cope with the potential isolation of online teaching; and the uncertainties created by differences in a wide range of cultural backgrounds. The development of psychological literacy will assist students in attaining not just a sound foundation in understanding human behavior, but also a greater ability to cope with the difficulties of first-year studies. Importantly, that is an outcome that is beneficial for all students, not just those majoring in psychology. If psychological literacy is to become a universal goal for all tertiary students, then this poses challenges for the way educators design first-year psychology courses. One key change is to make them more applied so that students can start understanding themselves and their own behaviors first, and develop the critical-Â� thinking and problem-solving skills needed to succeed in further academic studies and in life. The concept of psychological literacy opens up a broad vista of opportunities; it is now up to us to start maximizing the benefits for students and for society as a whole.

References Australian Psychology Accreditation Council. (2009). Rules for accreditation and accreditation standards for psychology courses. Retrieved from http://www.apac.psychology. org.au. Australian Social Inclusion Board. (2010). Social inclusion in Australia: how Australia is faring. Retrieved from http://www.socialinclusion.gov.au/Resources/Pages/Resources. aspx. Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian higher education: final report December 2008. Retrieved from www.deewr.gov.au/he_review_ finalreport. Burton, L. J. (2010). An interactive approach to writing essays and research reports in psychology. Brisbane, Australia: John Wiley & Sons. Burton, L. J., Taylor, J. A., Dowling, D. G., & Lawrence, J. (2009). Learning approaches, personality and concepts of knowledge of first-year students: mature-age versus school leaver. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 6, 65–81. Commonwealth of Australia. (2009). A stronger fairer Australia: a new social inclusion strategy. Launched Jan. 28, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.socialinclusion.gov.au/ Resources/Pages/Resources.aspx.


103

Cranney, J. (2008). Sustainable and evidence-based learning and teaching approaches to the undergraduate psychology curriculum. Strawberry Hills, New South Wales, Australia: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Retrieved from http://www.altc.edu.au/ resource-sustainable-evidence-based-learning-psychology-unsw-2008. Cranney, J., Morris, S., Spehar, B., & Scoufis, M. (2008). Helping first year students think like psychologists: supporting information literacy and teamwork skill development. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 7, 28–36. Cranney, J., Turnbull, C., Provost, S. C., Martin, F., Katsikitis, M., White, F. A., et al. (2009). Graduate attributes of the four-year Australian undergraduate psychology program. Australian Psychologist, 44, 253–262. Dahlsgaard, K., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Shared virtue: the convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Review of General Psychology, 9, 203–213. Dunn, D. S. (2009, September 21). Thinking about psychological literacy. How psychologically literate are you? Psychology Today. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday. com/blog/head-the-class/200909/thinking-about-psychological-literacy. Dunn, D. S., Halonen, J. S., & Smith, R. A. (Eds.) (2008). Teaching critical thinking in psychology: a handbook of best practices. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. James, R., Kraus, K.-L., & Jennings, C. (2010). The first year experience in Australian universities: findings from 1994 to 2009. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for the Study of Higher Education, the University of Melbourne. Keup, J. R. (2006). Promoting new-student success: assessing academic development and achievement among first-year students. New Directions for Student Services, 27–46. Retrieved from PsycARTICLES database. Lee, O., & Fradd, S. H. (1996). Interactional patterns of linguistically diverse students and teachers: Insights for promoting science learning. Linguistics and Education: An International Research Journal, 8, 269–297. Marks, G. N. (2007). Completing university: characteristics and outcomes of completing and non-completing students. Camberwell, Victoria: The Australian Council for Educational Research. Retrieved from http://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/ McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., et al. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Weisenberg, F., & Stacey, E. (2005). Reflections on teaching and learning online: quality program design, delivery and support issues from a cross-global perspective [Electronic version]. Distance Education, 26, 385–404.

8 Educational Psychology and Psychological Literacy in Higher Education Developmental and Cultural Aspects of Racial Diversity N i d a D e n s o n a n d M a r s h a In g

B

roadly speaking, educational psychology is the study of how people learn. In this chapter, we present several theories on the developmental and cul tural aspects of educational psychology in higher education and the con nection between diversity in higher education and psychological literacy. We begin by discussing how issues of racial and cultural diversity relate to psychological literacy and psychology undergraduate education. We then summarize several theories about how people learn and focus on the impact of racial and cultural diversity in higher education. We discuss how diversity helps to address strengths and gaps in the literature and discuss how educational psychology relates to psy chological literacy and the psychologically literate citizen. We conclude by describ ing what psychological literacy in educational psychology looks like, and we provide examples to facilitate the development of psychological literacy in under graduate psychology courses.

How Issues of Diversity Relate to Psychological Literacy and Psychology Undergraduate Education The American Psychological Association (APA) articulated a group of guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major that “captures a set of optimal expecta tions for performance at the completion of the baccalaureate degree by students who major in psychology” (APA, 2007, p. v). The APA also outlined 10 goals and suggested learning outcomes for the undergraduate psychology major. Half of these goals are knowledge, skills, and values consistent with a liberal arts education that are further developed in psychology courses. In addition, several goals focus on sociocultural and international awareness—in other words, “the recognition,

Educational Psychology and Psychological Literacy in Higher Education

105

understanding, and respect of the complexity of sociocultural and interÂ�national diversity” (APA, 2007, p. 20). The suggested learning outcome for this goal includes the ability to interact effectively and sensitively with diverse others while recognizing the prejudicial attitudes and behaviors that might exist in themselves and others. Together these learning goals and outcomes connect diversity, higher education, and psychological literacy. In addition to issues of diversity being relevant to undergraduates majoring in psychology, issues of diversity also have an impact on undergraduates enrolled in psychology courses. There are projections of large increases in the diversity of institutions of higher education in terms of ethnicity, gender, age, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, physical and mental abilities, language, socioeco nomic background, and academic preparation (see, e.g., Johnson & Rudmann, 2004; Littleford, Buskist, Frantz, Galvan, Hendersen, McCarthy, Page, & Puente, 2010; McGovern et al., 2010). Psychology is one of the more popular undergrad uate majors (National Center for Education Statistics, 2008), and even if students do not major in psychology, large numbers of undergraduates take an introduc tory psychology class (Halpern, 2010). These introductory psychology courses provide ways for students to connect psychology concepts and theories to their everyday lives and are opportunities to develop psychological literacy across a large portion of the undergraduate student population. With such large samples of students interested and enrolled in undergraduate psychology courses, these courses are, in turn, populated by students of different disciplinary orientations, in addition to diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, and prior experiences. This reality presents a tremendous opportunity within undergraduate psychology courses to promote the goal of sociocultural and inter national awareness. One method by which to facilitate this goal in undergradu ate students is to encourage formal and informal intergroup interactions and to ensure that the course objectives reflect the need to study and understand the needs of diverse populations of people (see, e.g., Adams, 1992; Bronstein & Quina, 1988; Puente et al., 1992, Whitten, 1993). Through undergraduate psychology courses focused on diversity, student experiences with diversity and diversityrelated activities contribute to students’ psychological literacy and prepare them to be psychologically literate citizens (see, e.g., Halpern, 2010).

Theories of How People Learn Theories on how people learn differ on numerous dimensions, including how learning is defined and the mechanisms through which people learn. For example, from a behaviorist perspective, learning is defined as a change in observable behavior, while a cognitive perspective defines learning in terms of an internal mental change that may or may not result in an observable change in behavior. In this chapter, we are particularly interested in the cultural and developmental aspects of how people learn. From a social cognitive perspective, individuals learn through direct experience and through watching and observing others

106

T he P s y chologically L iterate C iti z en

(see, e.g., Bandura, 1986; Vygotsky, 1962, 1978). The environment provides oppor tunities for social engagement, which mediates learning and development. Erik Erikson’s (1946, 1956) developmental theory of learning also recognizes the importance of environmental factors on development. Specifically, his theory delineates a lifelong developmental process of eight stages. At each stage, indi viduals are faced with a particular task to work through. During adolescence and early adulthood (Erikson’s stage 5), individuals experience an identity crisis where they are tasked with figuring out who they are. To discover their identity, individuals engage in exploration, and it is only after this exploration that they commit to an identity. This period, termed “psychosocial moratorium,” is the time during which individuals are free to explore new ideas, social roles, relationships, and so on. For some individuals, this period coincides with the first years of undergraduate educational experiences. According to Erikson, these initial col lege experiences are a crucial time for students to clearly define the roles they wish to fulfill later on in life. Ruble’s (1994) model of learning also emphasizes the importance of the first years of college because it is during this period that situations are typically mark edly different from students’ home environments, which increase the likeli hood that these experiences will affect the development of students’ cognitive growth. Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, and Gurin (2002) build on Ruble’s model and argue that this psychosocial moratorium is most effective when it coincides with novel experi ences, and especially novel experiences with racial diversity, because this forces students to think critically and make informed decisions based on new knowledge. Many campus environments typically provide students with their first exposure to surroundings that are dissimilar or incongruent with their home environments. Thus, arguments about a psychosocial moratorium and the importance of cog nitive disequilibrium provide a strong theoretical rationale for the importance of composing a racially or ethnically diverse student body for the purpose of creating a diverse and complex learning environment (Gurin et al., 2002). When viewed in this light, colleges and universities are catalysts for this identity devel opment stage by providing the ideal environment in which adolescents can explore new options and alternatives before entering adulthood. Thus, institutions are most successful when the campus environment is different enough from the stu dent’s home environment, allowing for discontinuity and discrepancy in their current cognitive structures. This creates an unbalanced state between an indi vidual’s prior conceptions and current evidence. This “cognitive disequilibrium” is a necessary component to facilitate learning (Piaget, 1985). These theories of learning emphasize the importance of the environment on student outcomes and the need to create environments that challenge individuals, thus influencing their intellectual and social development and their development of psychological literacy. In particular, interacting with diverse others has the potential to develop students’ abilities to interact effectively and sensitively with people of varying abilities, backgrounds, and cultural perspectives and facilitates understanding of how interaction with diverse others can challenge conventional understanding of psychological processes and behavior.


107

Current Trends One way for institutes of higher education to create a challenging environment for students is to create diverse environments (Milem, Chang, & Antonio, 2005; Williams, Berger, & McClendon, 2005). Diversity in higher education refers to a range of purposes, definitions, and issues that relate to various perspectives, pro grams, and initiatives. There continues to be great debate regarding diversity in higher education institutions, as evidenced by two U.S. Supreme Court cases chal lenging race-conscious admissions practices. In 2003, the Court rejected the University of Michigan’s formulaic approach for admitting undergraduates (Gratz v. Bollinger) but upheld the Law School’s practice of considering race in admissions (Grutter v. Bollinger). Although the Court was unsupportive of assigning bonus points to underrepresented students, it allowed colleges and universities to con tinue to consider race in admissions for the purpose of ensuring a racially and eth nically diverse student body. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who wrote the majority opinion for that case, stated that “student body diversity promotes learning out comes and better prepares students for an increasingly diverse workforce and soci ety, and better prepares them as professionals” (Grutter v. Bollinger, 2003, p. 18). In the literature, the vast majority of the empirical work on racial diversity to date has focused on three distinct forms: structural diversity, curricular/cocurricular diversity, and interaction diversity (Gurin et al., 2002; Terenzini, Cabrera, Colbeck, Bjorkland, & Parente, 2001). Below we describe these three forms of racial diversity and briefly review key research on these forms of diversity.

Structural Diversity Structural diversity refers to the numerical or proportional representation of diverse groups of students on a campus. One important component of struc tural diversity is the range of student groups represented in a particular institu tion. In other words, it is not sufficient for institutions to have a few racial or ethnic student populations, but it is more important for institutions to have a wide range of racial and ethnic student populations to be considered structur ally diverse. An example of an institution with high structural diversity in North America is one that has roughly equal proportions of students who are Caucasian, Asian American, African American, and Latino/a. This type of institu tion is in contrast to an institution with low structural diversity, where 95% of the student population is African American and only 5% of the student population is Caucasian. The perceived impact of structural diversity has been tested in a number of studies, which show that the degree to which racially diverse groups of students are represented in the student body has been positively associated with outcomes such as cognitive complexity (Antonio et al., 2004); problem solving, group func tioning, and occupational awareness (Terenzini et al., 2001); and even post-college outcomes such as attitudes towards affirmative action programs and ability to get

108


along with members of other races (Bowen & Bok, 1998). Not all studies examin ing structural diversity, however, report positive findings. For example, Rothman, Lipset, and Nevitte (2002) concluded that diversity had few positive and even many negative effects on attitudinal and educational outcomes. Specifically, when structural diversity increased, students’ satisfaction and the perceived quality of their education decreased, and perceived discrimination increased. One potential reason for the inconsistency in findings regarding the impact of structural diversity is that student body composition is an insufficient condition in and of itself for maximizing educational benefits. Rather, its value appears to depend on whether it leads to greater levels of engagement in diversity-related activities, such as curricular diversity and cross-racial interaction (CRI). Indeed, several studies have specifically examined this relationship and demonstrated that the structural diversity of an institution does indeed shape curricular diversity and opportunities to interact with diverse peers (Chang, Astin, & Kim, 2004; Pike & Kuh, 2006). Thus, when there is a diverse student body, the environment enhances the chances that students will become more involved in diversity-related activities and socialize more often across racial groups; in turn, having these types of involvement and interaction can have a positive impact on students’ develop ment (Chang, 2001; Gurin, 1999). However, of the three forms, structural diver sity has received the least empirical attention, probably because of its seemingly distal relationship to student outcomes.

Curricular/Co-curricular Diversity Curricular or co-curricular diversity refers to institutionally structured and pur poseful programmatic efforts to help students engage in diversity with respect to both ideas and people. Students encounter this form of diversity through course work and curriculum, or through participation in activities such as racial/cultural awareness workshops and student organizations. This form of diversity is consid ered formal because of the institution level of coordination required to implement these activities. The institution, for example, might require all students to enroll in a particular course. The Association of American Colleges and Universities conducted a survey of 543 colleges and universities in the United States and found that 54% of survey respondents have some sort of diversity requirement (Humphreys, 2000). Of those institutions that have a requirement, 83% have one or more courses addressing diversity in the United States, 65% offer one or more courses addressing diversity outside the United States, and 78% offer one or more non-Western culture courses (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2000). There are differences in how institutions decide to implement these require ments, but a majority of the institutions (68%) with a diversity coursework requirement allow students to select courses among a list of approved diversity courses (Humphreys, 2000). A much smaller percentage of the institutions (17%) require all students to take a single course with the same syllabus (Humphreys, 2000). Despite the lack of standardization in implementing diversity coursework,


109

curricular/co-curricular diversity has been shown to be positively associated with outcomes such as intergroup attitudes (Lopez, 2004); racial bias (Denson, 2009); racial prejudice and intergroup understanding (Chang, 2002); critical thinking skills (Nelson Laird, 2005); learning and democracy outcomes (Gurin et al., 2002); civic, job-related, and learning outcomes (Hurtado, 2001, 2005); academic selfconfidence and social agency (Nelson Laird, 2005); social action engagement out comes (Nelson Laird, Engberg, & Hurtado, 2005); and action-oriented democratic outcomes (Zúñiga, Williams, & Berger, 2005). Curricular and co-curricular diver sity have received substantial empirical attention, possibly because they represent institutions’ efforts to engage students in diversity activities.

Interaction Diversity Interaction diversity refers to the extent and quality of CRI that occurs during the normal course of undergraduate life that contributes to students’ learning and educational experiences. This type of diversity differs from curricular/ co-curricular diversity in that it includes not only formal but also informal inter actions students have with each other on a day-to-day basis, such as those that occur in the cafeteria or dormitory. These informal interactions may or may not be influenced by more formal curricular/co-curricular diversity requirements. Interaction diversity has been shown to be positively associated with outcomes such as intergroup attitudes (Lopez, 2004); cultural knowledge and understanding and leadership skills (Antonio, 2001); student learning and personal development (Hu & Kuh, 2003); learning and democracy outcomes (Gurin et al., 2002); civic, job-related, and learning outcomes (Hurtado, 2001); critical thinking skills (Nelson Laird, 2005); academic self-confidence and social agency (Nelson Laird, 2005); action-oriented democratic outcomes (Chang, Astin, & Kim, 2004; Zúñiga et al., 2005); intellectual and social self-confidence and student retention (Chang et al., 2004); and students’ satisfaction with their overall college experience (Chang, 2001). Like curricular/co-curricular diversity, interaction diversity is widely studied because it represents institutions’ efforts to engage students with diversity both formally and informally and is likely to have the greatest impact on student outcomes. Our review of the literature shows how all three aspects of diversity contribute positively to student development. Although distinct, all three aspects of diversity are interrelated and dependent upon one another. For example, while structural diversity is necessary, the benefits will be realized only if it increases the likelihood that students will interact with others of another race. Similarly, while curricular/ co-curricular diversity activities contribute positively to student development, the benefits are even greater when the curricular/co-curricular diversity activities also incorporate a CRI component. For example, learning and reading about another culture in a diversity course may contribute to student development, but greater gains in learning are likely to occur if there is an opportunity for group discussions about these issues among diverse groups of students. Passively reading

110


a textbook or listening to a lecture about another culture might not be as powerful a learning opportunity without the chance to discuss and learn from other students about what was read or heard and how this culture is similar or different to their own experiences. Of the three types of diversity, interaction diversity seems to have the greatest impact on student outcomes. Together, these three types of racial diversity describe the range of ways in which institutes of higher education can enhance and capitalize on the benefits of diversity, which in turn maximize student learning.

Strengths and Gaps The literature overwhelmingly supports the benefits of diversity at the student level. Specifically, student engagement in curricular/co-curricular diversity activi ties and CRI has a positive impact on all students. Thus, we know what works at the student level, and much progress has been made in explaining student-level effects by drawing from psychological theories (i.e., Erikson, 1946, 1956; Gurin et al, 2002; Piaget, 1985). The educational benefits of diversity are also apparent in studies that focus on systemic or environmental approaches. In particular, the environmental or systemic effects on students are well documented in higher education research (e.g., Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991, 2005), which suggests that the context in which learning takes place can have a measurable impact on students, independent of a given student’s own behavior. There is a need to examine the benefits of diver sity by looking at the larger context or environment in which these interactions occur. Recent studies have begun to test the diversity-related environmental effects on undergraduate students (e.g., Denson & Chang, 2009; Umbach & Kuh, 2006). One of these recent studies demonstrated benefits of four institutional mea sures of diversity on a variety of outcomes. Although their study primarily focused on students attending liberal arts colleges, Umbach and Kuh (2006) found numer ous positive benefits of (1) the “diversity density index” (i.e., the probability that a student will interact with a student from another race), (2) institutional “climate for diversity” (i.e., students’ perceptions of the emphasis their institution places on encouraging contact among students from different backgrounds), (3) “diver sity in coursework” (i.e., the extent to which students reported their classes included readings or discussions related to diversity), and (4) “diversity press” (i.e., a scale made up of the three other diversity measures: structural diversity, the extent to which students perceive that diversity is valued and important, and curricular diversity). The outcomes included measures of student engagement (e.g., engagement in diversity-related activities), perceptions of a supportive campus environment (e.g., supportive learning environment), self-reported gains in learning and intellectual development (e.g., gains in general education), and self-reported gains in social awareness (e.g., gains in understanding of diversity). While all four institutional measures of diversity were positively associated with


111

many of the outcomes, this was particularly true for the outcomes of student engagement in diversity-related activities and gains in social awareness as mea sured by understanding of diversity. If similar contextual or normative effects associated with the various forms of diversity can be replicated, it would suggest that the effects of diversity are even more far-reaching than previously demonstrated—that is, previous attempts to explain the effects of diversity using a psychological approach to look at bene fits for individuals may not be sufficient. Instead, having a larger percentage of students who participate in diversity opportunities may also require sociologi cal or organizational lenses to look at effects at the institution level. With respect to organizational impact, for example, Berger (2000) found that different patterns of organizational behavior do indeed affect outcomes in various ways for different students. He claimed that although there are many viable theories to explain how organizations affect students in higher education, one of his important findings was that high levels of an organizational behavior create intense organizational environments that exert stronger uniform effects on student outcomes. Berger regarded this finding as support for Clark, Heist, McConnell, Trow, and Yonge’s (1972) assertion that “campuses exert a more powerful impact on student outcomes when those colleges have clear visions that are articulated through con gruent and consistent sets of policies, procedures, traditions, and espousal of values in everyday campus life” (p. 191). Institutional-level effects should be fur ther documented in the literature, to elaborate on how diversity is considered both practically and theoretically. An example (Denson & Chang, 2009) is given in the next section.

Psychological Literacy and Diversity in Higher Education Student experiences with diversity in the university promote the development of psychological literacy, the proposed outcome of the psychology major, which includes graduate attributes such as critical thinking, writing, numeracy, informa tion literacy, ethics, and scientific literacy. Below we briefly review some key stud ies demonstrating the relationship between engagement with diversity (i.e., structural, curricular, and interactional) and the development of psychological literacy. Antonio and colleagues (2004) carried out an experiment to test the perceived impact of structural diversity on complex thinking in white university students. Students were randomly assigned to one of four small-group discussion condi tions. Specifically, they manipulated the race of a confederate participant (black, white) and opinion on the target social issue for discussion (agreed or disagreed) in an all-white discussion group. Drawing upon theories of minority influence, the researchers tested the hypothesis that when minority opinions and individuals are present in homogeneous groups, cognitive complexity is stimulated among majority members. The findings showed that the presence of a black student in an

112


otherwise all-white discussion group enhanced complex thinking, particularly when group discussions involved an issue that was racially charged (e.g., the death penalty). The experiment also showed that participants in group discussions were more likely to view minority confederates than white confederates as having (1) caused others to think about issues in different ways, (2) introduced novel per spectives to the discussion, and (3) influenced the group. The authors concluded that racial and ethnic compositional diversity can create richer and more complex social and learning environments than racially homogeneous ones, which subse quently can serve as an educational tool to promote all students’ learning and development. Chang, Denson, Sáenz, and Misa (2006) tested both student- and institutionlevel effects associated with CRI using 1994–1998 data from UCLA’s Higher Education Research Institute’s Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP), a national, representative longitudinal dataset of almost 20,000 American university students from over 220 institutions. The students were administered a survey at the beginning of their freshman year, and then again at the end of their fourth year of college. They found unique positive effects for both student engage ment with diversity as well as student body engagement with diversity. Specifically, even though a student’s own level of CRI is a more direct and powerful way to realize developmental gains associated with openness to diversity (e.g., knowl edge and acceptance of people of different races), cognitive development (e.g., problem solving, critical thinking, and general knowledge), and self-confidence (e.g., intellectual and social), students also benefit uniquely from being enrolled in an institution that sustains positive race relations. They examined an identical set of variables reported at both the student and institution levels (i.e., student-level CRI and institution-level CRI), which allowed them to better differentiate between the effects of a student’s own behavior and the effects of the broader context asso ciated with that behavior. In a more recent study using the same dataset, Denson and Chang (2009) simultaneously tested all three aspects of diversity: structural diversity (institu tion-level), curricular diversity (both student-level and institution-level), and CRI (both student-level and institution-level). The institution-level structural diver sity was represented by the percentage of underrepresented minority students on a campus, while the institution-level curricular diversity and institution-level CRI were represented by the student body averages of curricular diversity and CRI, respectively. The role of all three aspects of diversity was examined in selfreported growth in self-efficacy (e.g., intellectual self-confidence, drive to achieve, competitiveness), academic skills (e.g., general knowledge, problem-solving), and racial/cultural engagement (e.g., knowledge and ability to get along with others of another race). Specifically, they found that campuses where students are more engaged with racial diversity through related knowledge acquisition or CRI appear to have measurable positive effects on all students irrespective of a stu dent’s own frequency of engagement with diversity. While this study replicated their earlier findings (i.e., Chang et al., 2006), they also found that there appeared to be benefits that accrued to students by being in an environment where their


113

peers were actively engaged in curricular and co-curricular diversity activities as well. Thus, it appears that there are appreciable educational benefits associated with diversity-related involvement, which are independent of a student’s own level of engagement and point to benefits also of being immersed in such an institu tional context that sustains positive race relations.

The Psychologically Literate Citizen and Diversity in Higher Education Students’ experiences with diversity in the university also provide them with the foundation for living in an increasingly multicultural world. It is through their experiences with diverse others that students develop the skills and abilities needed to work cooperatively and effectively with others and to become active and contributing members of society. Below we briefly summarize some key lon gitudinal studies demonstrating the link between diversity and/or engagement with diversity-related activities and the psychologically literate citizen. One of the best-known longitudinal studies examining structural diversity is Bowen and Bok’s The Shape of the River (1998). This study was a collaborative effort between Bowen and Bok, the former college presidents of Princeton and Harvard, respectively. Their study followed over 80,000 students who attended 28 academi cally selective universities between the early 1950s and early 1990s. In addition to collecting data on admissions criteria, graduation rates, and post-college careers, they also used surveys and interviews to examine the academic, employment, and personal histories of these students. Although the main focus of the study was on African Americans and their post-college achievements, the authors also found that both white and African American alumni reported having benefited from structural diversity. In particular, alumni held more positive attitudes towards affir mative action programs and felt that diversity helped them get along better with members of others races. Gurin (1999) provided the expert report on the educational value of diversity for the two lawsuits against the University of Michigan’s undergraduate and law school admissions policies. She provided evidence using data from three longitu dinal datasets: 9-year multi-institutional CIRP data (1985, 1989, and 1994), Michigan Student Study (MSS) data (1990, 1991, 1992, and 1994), and Michigan’s Intergroup Relations, Community, and Conflict (IGRCC) program data (1990, 1991, and 1994). Gurin synthesized and summarized the apparent effects of diver sity on learning and democracy outcomes. Her learning outcomes included mea sures of active thinking processes, engagement and motivation, intellectual and academic skills, and values placed on these skills post-college. Her democracy outcomes referred to citizenship engagement, racial/cultural engagement, and the belief in commonality across various ethnic and cultural groups. Specifically, Gurin showed how structural diversity is positively associated with increases in curricular diversity and opportunities to interact with diverse peers. In turn, both curricular diversity and CRI are associated with increases in learning and

114


democracy outcomes at the end of college, and even 5 years post-college. Both of these outcomes are key attributes of psychologically literate citizens. Jayakumar (2008) used a more recent 10-year multi-institutional CIRP dataset (1994, 1998, and 2004) investigating the relationship between exposure to racial diversity during university and cross-cultural workforce competencies 5 years after college. Her cross-cultural workforce competencies included pluralistic orientation (i.e., multiple perspective-taking orientation) and leadership skills (e.g., leadership ability, public speaking, ability to negotiate controversial issues). Jayakumar focused on white students at predominantly white institutions and the moderating effects of pre-college neighborhood composition. Specifically, the sample was divided into two groups: a segregated pre-college neighborhood sample (those who reported that “most” or “all” of the people in their neighbor hood were of the same race) and a racially diverse pre-college neighborhood sample (those who reported that “none” to “half ” of the people in their neighbor hood were of the same race). She found that while structural diversity was not directly related to CRI, it was mediated by campus racial climate (as measured by the institutional CRI average) regardless of whether students grew up in segre gated or diverse neighborhoods. She also found lasting benefits of CRI during college: it positively predicted pluralistic orientation post-college, regardless of whether students socialized with others of another race pre-college or contin ued to socialize with others of another race post-college. Thus, Jayakumar’s study provides further support for the importance of encouraging CRI during college in developing psychologically literate citizens of the future.

Summary, Suggestions, and Implications for Educational Practice There is great potential for the concept of psychological literacy to affect a large number of undergraduates. In this chapter we focus on diversity, a particular aspect that can influence the development of psychological literacy. There are many ways to facilitate the development of psychological literacy in undergradu ate psychology courses: • Improving the institutional climate for racial and cultural diversity requires a comprehensive approach as well as a long-term perspective. The first step in doing this is to raise awareness and build consensus among undergraduate psychology faculty members about what psychological literacy is and why it is important. • Faculty members should have clear conceptions on ways to measure psychological literacy to monitor progress and provide feedback on their instruction. To help with this process, developing a common measure or metric that could be administered to undergraduate psychology students to gauge their psychological literacy before and after coursework is recommended.


115

• Faculty members should receive support in their efforts to systematically implement psychological literacy in their courses. This support will help faculty members make connections between existing content in undergraduate psychology courses and how this content relates to psychological literacy. In addition to seeing the interrelatedness between psychological literacy and undergraduate coursework, faculty members should be supported in their implementation of various instructional strategies as they attempt to engage and promote positive interactions between students of racially and culturally diverse perspectives. • There should be plans for longitudinal studies that follow these same students over time to see the extent to which students develop and integrate psychological literacy in their everyday lives as adults. This is another way to learn more about the development of psychological literacy as a function of undergraduate experiences. We know that there is great potential in promoting different types of diversity, but less is known about how diversity experiences as an undergraduate foster the development of psychological literacy. To measure such development, longitudinal studies across multiple institutions should be implemented. We know that individual student development varies between and within institutions, so it would be necessary to follow a range of students within each institution. We suggest looking not only at student-level outcomes but also at outcomes for different groups of students within particular institutions, as well as characteristics of institutions that have an impact on individual students and groups of students. Using a framework that accounts for the impact of diversity on the nested nature of data is needed to better understand these relationships. • Campuses should think beyond increasing structural diversity alone, because the value of diversity depends on whether or not it leads to greater levels of engagement in diversity-related activities such as curricular/co-curricular diversity and CRI. Thus, facilitating CRI, such as in the context of a group project, is one way to provide structured opportunities for positive and meaningful intergroup contact. The institutional evidence reported in this chapter suggests that there should be a strong relationship between diversity and psychological literacy in psychol ogy undergraduate programs. Research suggests that structural, curricular/ co-curricular, and interaction diversity are interconnected and interdependent, so focusing on only one aspect will have less of an impact on psychological literacy compared to a more comprehensive approach that includes all three forms of diversity. As we have tried to emphasize here, it is through the combination of institutional support, a diverse student body, and breadth of both structured and unstructured opportunities for CRI that universities can play a pivotal role in shaping and developing psychological literacy in their graduates and the next generation of psychologically literate citizens.

116


References Adams, M. (Ed.). (1992). Promoting diversity in college classrooms: innovative responses for the curriculum, faculty, and institutions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. American Psychological Association (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, D. C.: Author. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ ed/precollege/about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf. Antonio, A. L. (2001). The role of interracial interaction in the development of leader ship skills and cultural knowledge and understanding. Research in Higher Education, 42, 593–617. Antonio, A. L., Chang, M. J., Hakuta, K., Kenny, D. A., Levin, S., & Milem, J. F. (2004). Effects of racial diversity on complex thinking in college students. Psychological Science, 15, 507–510. Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2000). National survey on diversity in the undergraduate curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/divsurvey/ index.cfm. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social-cognitive theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Berger, J. B. (2000). Organizational behavior at colleges and student outcomes: a new perspective on college impact. The Review of Higher Education, 23, 177–198. Bowen, W. G., & Bok, D. (1998). The shape of the river: long-term consequences of considering race in college and university admissions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bronstein, P. A., & Quina, K. (1988). Teaching a psychology of people: resources for gender and sociocultural awareness. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Chang, M. J. (2001). Is it more than about getting along? The broader educational relevance of reducing students’ racial biases. Journal of College Student Development, 42, 93–105. Chang, M. J. (2002). The impact of an undergraduate diversity course requirement on students’ level of racial prejudice. Journal of General Education, 51, 21–42. Chang, M. J., Astin, A. W., & Kim, D. (2004). Cross-racial interaction among under graduates: some causes and consequences. Research in Higher Education, 45, 527–551. Chang, M. J., Denson, N., Sáenz, V., & Misa, K. (2006). The educational benefits of sustaining cross-racial interaction among undergraduates. Journal of Higher EduÂ� cation, 77, 430–455. Clark, B. R., Heist, P., McConnell, T. R., Trow, M. A., & Yonge, G. (1972). Students and colleges: interaction and change. Berkeley, CA: Center for Research and Develop ment in Higher Education. Denson, N. (2009). Do curricular and co-curricular diversity activities influence racial bias? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 79, 805–838. Denson, N., & Chang, M. J. (2009). Diversity matters: the impact of diversity-related student engagement and institutional context. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 322–353. Erikson, E. (1946). Ego development and historical change. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 2, 359–396.


117

Erikson, E. (1956). The problem of ego identity. Journal of American Psychoanalytic Association, 4, 56–121. Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003). Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306 (2003). Gurin, P. (Sept, 1999). Expert Report. “Gratz et al. v. Bollinger, et al.” No. 97–75321 (E.D. Mich.); “Grutter, et al. v. Bollinger, et al.” No. 97–75928 (E.D. Mich.). Equity & Excellence in Education, 32(2), 36–62. Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher edu cation: theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 330–366. Halpern, D. F. (Ed.). (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2003). Diversity experiences and college student learning and personal development. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 320–334. Humphreys, D. (2000). National survey finds diversity requirements common around the country. Diversity Digest, 5. Retrieved from http://www.diversityweb.org/digest/ F00/survey.html. Hurtado, S. (2001). Linking diversity and educational purpose: how diversity affects the classroom environment and student development. In G. Orfield (Ed.), Diversity challenged: legal crisis and new evidenc, (pp. 187–203). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Publishing Group. Hurtado, S. (2005). The next generation of diversity and intergroup relations research. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 595–610. Jayakumar, U. M. (2008). Can higher education meet the needs of an increasingly diverse and global society? Campus diversity and cross-cultural workforce competencies. Harvard Educational Review, 78(4), 615–651. Johnson, R. L., & Rudmann, J. L. (2004). Psychology at community colleges: a survey. Teaching of psychology, 31, 183–185. Littleford, L. H., Buskist, W., Frantz, S. M., Galvan, D. B., Hendersen, R. W., McCarthy, M. A., Page, M. C., & Puente, A. E. (2010). Psychology students today and tomorrow. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology (pp. 63–79). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Lopez, G. E. (2004). Interethnic contact, curriculum, and attitudes in the first year of college. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 75–94. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Milem, J. F., Chang, M. J., & Antonio, A. L. (2005). Making diversity work on campus: a research-based perspective. Retrieved May 26, 2010, from http://aacu.org/inclusive_ excellence/documents/Milem_et_al.pdf. National Center for Education Statistics. (2008). Integrated postsecondary education data system (PEDS) fall enrollment survey: Digest of Education Statistics: 2007. Retrieved May 26, 2010, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/ch_3.asp. Nelson Laird, T. F. (2005). College students’ experiences with diversity and their effects on academic self-confidence, social agency, and disposition toward critical thinking. Research in Higher Education, 46, 365–387.

118


Nelson Laird, T. F., Engberg, M. E., & Hurtado, S. (2005). Modeling accentuation effects: enrolling in a diversity course and the importance of social action engagement. Journal of Higher Education, 76, 448–476. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: a third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Piaget, J. (1985). The equilibrium of cognitive structures: the central problem of intellectual development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D. (2006). Relationships among structural diversity, informal peer interactions and perceptions of the campus environment. Review of Higher Education, 29, 425–450. Puente, A. E., Matthews, J. R., & Brewer, C. L. (Eds.). (1992). Teaching psychology in America: a history. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Rothman, S., Lipset, S. M., & Nevitte, N. (2002). Does enrollment diversity improve university education? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 15, 8–26. Ruble, D. (1994). A phase model of transitions: cognitive and motivational consequences. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 163–214. Terenzini, P. T., Cabrera, A. F., Colbeck, C. L., Bjorklund, S. A., & Parente, J. M. (2001). Racial and ethnic diversity in the classroom: does it promote student learning? Journal of Higher Education, 72, 509–531. Umbach, P. D., & Kuh, G. D. (2006). Student experiences with diversity at liberal arts colleges: another claim for distinctiveness. Journal of Higher Education, 77, 169–192. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Whitten, L. A. (1993). Infusing Black psychology into the introductory psychology course. Teaching of Psychology, 20, 13–21. Williams, D. A., Berger, J. B., & McClendon, S. A. (2005). Toward a model of inclusive excellence and change in postsecondary institutions. Washington, D. C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Zúñiga, X., Williams, E. A., & Berger, J. B. (2005). Action-oriented democratic outcomes: the impact of student involvement with campus diversity. Journal of College Student Development, 46, 660–678.

9 The Role of Positive Psychology in Creating the Psychologically Literate Citizen S u z y G r e e n, Pau l a L . R o b i n s o n a n d L i n d s ay G. Oa d e s

P

ositive psychology has been defined as the scientific study of the conditions and processes that contribute to the flourishing or optimal functioning of people, groups, and institutions (Gable & Haidt, 2005). An underlying premise of this science is that mental health is more than the absence of mental illness and therefore it is valid and important to enhance well-being and cultivate positive emotions (Keyes, 2007). Noble and McGrath (2008) claim that many of the components of positive psychology are not new; however, Linley and Joseph (2004) believe that it is a useful umbrella term that has the potential to unite a range of related but disparate directions in theory and research about what makes life worth living. Positive psychology can be differentiated from previous “positive” approaches in psychology because it is firmly grounded in empirical research (Seligman, 2007). In this chapter, we will provide an overview and history of the emergence of positive psychology. We will argue for its inclusion in higher education to provide a broader knowledge and application base for the creation of psychologically literate students and citizens. In addition to enhancing critical thinking, positive psychology can play an important role in educating the public, from a rigorous scientific base, about the benefits of psychological approaches for the well-being of individuals, families, workplaces, and our communities. This approach contrasts with the ad hoc reliance of the public on information that is selectively and uncritically printed in newspapers and many self-help books.

Positive Psychology Positive psychology was officially launched in the United States in 1998 when Martin Seligman gave his address as President of the American Psychological Association. Seligman not only articulated a vision for the beginning of positive psychology as a new subfield of psychology, but also portrayed a broader vision

120

T h e P s y c h o l o gi c ally L it e r at e Citi z e n

for psychology. A section of the executive summary from the Positive Psychology Network Paper (Seligman, 1998) illustrates the significant role that the behavioral and social sciences play in understanding and creating flourishing individuals, families, and communities: Entering a new millennium, we face a historical choice. Left alone on the pinnacle of economic and political leadership, the United States can continue to increase its material wealth while ignoring the human needs of its people and that of the rest of the planet. Such a course is likely to lead to increasing selfishness, alienation between the more and the less fortunate, and eventually to chaos and despair. At this juncture the social and behavioral sciences can play an enormously important role. They can articulate a vision of the good life that is empirically sound while being understandable and attractive. They can show what actions lead to well-being, to positive individuals, and to flourishing communities. Humanistic psychology similarly articulated the need for psychology as a science to emphasize the “fully functioning individual.” Robbins (2008) noted that for the past half-century humanistic psychology has focused its attention on what it means to flourish as a human being and noted Maslow’s (1987) strong influence as someone who “purposely set out to study those individuals who were extraordinary—who had, in one way or another, come to approximate the fullest potentials of humanity” (p. 354). While most undergraduate (UG) courses in psychology provide at least an introduction to humanistic psychology, it is by no means a large part of the curriculum, and it continues to be criticized for its lack of scientific validity, a gap that positive psychology aims to fill. Joseph and Linley (2006) claim that positive psychology is a discipline characterized by good empirical science. The body of knowledge currently available on positive psychology starts to provide a balance to traditional psychology with its historical focus on the negatives (e.g., published psychological articles of negative emotions outnumber those of positive emotions by a ratio of 17 to 1; Myers & Diener, 1995).

Positive Psychology in Academia Positive psychology has not yet become fully accepted as mainstream psychology; in particular, it is not part of compulsory content in accredited UG programs in Australia or the United Kingdom. Most of the existing positive psychology units are offered at the graduate level in named programs, although there are increasing numbers of academics choosing to teach positive psychology as a “special topics” unit or as part of other UG units. For example, in 2006 a subject at Harvard University entitled “Positive Psychology” was offered to all undergraduates and became the most popular subject that semester (Ben-Shahar, 2007). There is also increasing positive psychology research being conducted by traditional social,

The Role of Positive Psychology in Creating the Psychologically Literate Citizen

121

personality, or clinical psychology researchers, and a growing number of introductory texts are being made available to those who may include positive psychology as part of their existing UG lecture series (e.g., Baumgardner & Crothers, 2009; Compton, 2004; Peterson, 2006). We suggest that the uptake of positive psychology at the UG level is more widespread in the United States than in Australia or the United Kingdom at the current time. The first graduate masters program offered in positive psychology was the masters of applied positive psychology offered by the University of Pennsylvania, followed by a similar masters of applied psychology offered by the University of East London. In Australia, there are currently no masters programs available specifically on positive psychology, with only graduate certificates being offered (e.g., the University of Sydney’s Graduate Certificate in Applied Positive Psychology). More difficult to assess, but important to track, is the number of PhD dissertations that can be broadly defined as investigating positive psychology-related topics. In Australia, it appears that Monash University, the University of Sydney, and the University of Wollongong have the majority of such projects underway. Despite the current lack of academic support and formal learning opportunities, there is increasing interest within the general community (where most do not have undergraduate degrees in psychology) in positive psychology and its related topics of inquiry such as happiness, well-being, and character strengths and virtues (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Fortunately there is some indication that educators are beginning to integrate positive psychology into their existing courses, because students (members of the general public) and also educators are seeing its value (D. S. Dunn, personal communication, Aug. 23, 2010).

Developing Psychological Literacy Positive psychology’s primary scientific focus is on understanding and creating well-being and good citizenship (i.e., feeling good and doing good); therefore, it has much to offer students in developing psychological literacy and in becoming psychologically literate citizens (McGovern et al., 2010). Peterson and Seligman’s (2004) taxonomy of virtues and character strengths and the associated language of well-being, together with goals of increasing positive mental health and mental illness prevention, provide further support for inclusion of positive psychology in a broader curriculum that assists students to develop psychological literacy. As noted previously, positive psychology’s primary impact in tertiary education at present is at the graduate level. Graduate students undertaking a masters in applied positive psychology or a masters in applied science (coaching psychology) degree (also described as an applied positive psychology; Interest Group in Coaching Psychology, Australian Psychological Society) are keen to increase their knowledge of this relevant and increasingly popular topic and apply it either in their current careers or explore opportunities to create careers based on the theory, research, and practice of positive psychology. A good example is the coaching

122


(executive and life) industry, where individuals with varied career histories are keen to create new career paths, with a focus on assisting others to thrive in their lives. The research base of positive psychology, with its emphasis on the scientific study of optimal functioning, has much to offer the coaching industry (BiswasDiener & Dean, 2007; Kaufmann, 2006; but see Ehrenreich, 2009). Similarly, those undertaking masters in applied positive psychology programs come from broad backgrounds and are keen to learn, embed, and live positive psychology (Seligman et al., 2009) in both their personal and professional lives. Such graduate programs assist in the creation of psychologically literate citizens. There is a well-established need for those involved in the design and delivery of UG psychology curricula to acknowledge the growing research base of positive psychology and to include it as a relevant subfield within psychology. The relative unavailability of the primary theory and research topics within positive psychology in UG curricula may force students to seek courses elsewhere. Many students may have been led to their tertiary psychology studies by a keen interest raised through “pop psychology” where topics such as happiness and well-being are ever-present and the pursuit of happiness has become somewhat obsessive. Such students may soon discover that the topics of positive psychology are notably absent. The absence of opportunities in tertiary education for rigorous exploration and critical assessment of theory and research on topics such as happiness will not allow students to critically evaluate their lay popular psychology knowledge. Moreover, they will be ill equipped to educate those in their families, workplaces, and communities who also may share a thirst for knowledge on such topics. Unless the curriculum is modified, psychology students will lack a complete and rounded knowledge of psychological theory, research, and practice. Some of the challenges for positive psychology that may have led to the lack of inclusion in UG psychology programs include criticisms for being too “Pollyanna-ish” and succumbing to Western culture’s “tyranny of the positive attitude” (Ehrenreich, 2009). Another key criticism has been the failure to appreciate the adaptive and constructive aspects of unpleasant states of mind (Held, 2002; Lazarus, 2003; Wilson, 2008; Woolfolk, 2002). We argue that these criticisms are healthy in the main and provide the necessary stimulation to clarify misperceptions and to deepen more superficial explanations and definitions of positive psychology that are common within the broader community. We suggest that such challenges highlight further the need to have greater research input on such topics, and indeed that academic experts have a duty of care to clarify misperceptions and educate the public accordingly. There are, however, many internationally renowned researchers, such as Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Christopher Peterson, George Vaillant, and Howard Gardner, who identify themselves firmly in the field of positive psychology along with Martin Seligman, and who undertake research on a variety of topics subsumed under the positive psychology umbrella. A search conducted in preparation for writing this chapter showed 1,680 citations for the term “positive psychology” on the database PsycInfo. Given that positive psychology is only approximately 10 years old, this is a significant number of citations.


123

Giving Positive Psychology Away While positive psychology research increases and interest by tertiary educators slowly stirs, as noted earlier, the primary interest currently sits within the Western community, where an unquenchable thirst for anything relating to “happiness” or “positivity” continues (Google hits for “positive psychology” equaled 4,970,000 at the time of writing this chapter). Advertisers and marketers have also jumped on the “positivity bandwagon,” and there are increasing attempts to leverage sales based on the consequential benefits of being happy (e.g., Coca-Cola’s recent advertising tagline is “open happiness,” Australian bottled water maker Mount Franklin’s slogan is “drink positive, think positive,” and the theme song of the Australian health insurer MBF is “Accentuate the Positive”). Given the huge interest in happiness and well-being in our society, it is essential that “pop psychology” does not “shout the loudest” and inform our communities on the key facets of well-being. The obvious dangers are that superficial applications of “think positive” or “be grateful” can in fact backfire with vulnerable individuals who may be clinically depressed or suicidal. Society needs a rigorous evidence base complemented by scientific theory and clear conceptualization of psychological phenomena from which to draw knowledge. Our citizens, like our students, also need to be encouraged to be critical thinkers when it comes to mental health or mental fitness—much like the area of physical health and fitness, which has become increasingly sophisticated, with a significant scientific knowledge base informing our health providers, our media, and our communities, with practice informed by science. While charlatans will continue to offer “happiness-snake oil” and pop psychology providers will continue to operate without regulation (particularly in times when there is a pressing need to “make a quick buck”), the behavioral sciences can and should provide evidence for and against particular claims. To this end, there is a need for those with majors in psychology to be educated in the broader concepts of a “new and modern psychology” that includes not only a focus on problem resolution and symptom reduction, but also a more balanced perspective that includes prevention—essentially, a knowledge base on what it takes to be a flourishing individual and to create flourishing societies. Joseph and Linley (2006) state that the aim of positive psychology is “to promote a more holistic approach to psychology, concerned equally with both positive and negative experiences, so that ultimately, if successful, the term positive might simply fall away leaving the entire discipline of psychology transformed” (pp. 5–6). The rigorous application of positive psychology in the community is aligned to the spirit of giving psychology away (Miller, 1969).

Positive Psychology Interventions During its first 10 years, Positive psychology research has focussed on specific topics within the domains of positive subjective experience, positive character

124


traits, and enabling institutions (Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005). Based on this research, positive psychology interventions (PPIs) have been and continue to be developed. PPIs are intentional activities that aim to increase well-being through the cultivation of positive feelings, cognitions, and behaviors. Examples include identifying and developing strengths; cultivating gratitude; and visualizing best possible selves (Seligman et al., 2005; Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2006). A meta-analysis conducted by Sin and Lyubomirksy (2009) of 51 PPIs with 4,266 individuals revealed that PPIs do significantly enhance well-being and decrease depressive symptoms. Many of these PPIs are aimed at a “normal population” rather than a “clinical population,” and research on the use of PPIs in clinical settings is currently scant. Many of the masters programs in positive psychology require students (most of whom do not have UG degrees in psychology) to undertake “capstone projects” or “applied research” whereby they are encouraged to apply their knowledge to themselves, their families, their workplaces, or their communities. Many students choose to replicate PPIs such as kindness or gratitude interventions. While it may be argued that you do not need a degree in psychology to be kind or grateful, there are concerns that without a thorough psychological assessment prior to conducting the intervention, there may be a real danger of a negative outcome rather than the intended positive one. For example, if school students were to undertake a “strengths-based coaching intervention” and fail to apply their strengths sufficiently or achieve their goals due to an underlying clinical disorder such as depression, there may be a danger of worsening the clinical disorder rather than improving the child’s well-being. This issue is one that has been raised in the coaching field, whereby many coaches assume that those signing up for coaching fall within the “normal population.” In fact, this may be largely untrue, based on the results of three scientific studies showing that 25% to 52% of people attending life-coaching interventions have significantly high levels of psychological distress (Green, Oades, & Grant, 2006; Spence & Grant, 2007), and 38% of executives presenting for executive coaching similarly report high levels of psychological distress (Kemp & Green, 2010). These mental health or “screening” issues have not yet been raised or discussed adequately within the positive psychology literature. This would, however, suggest that adequate training in general psychology, particularly assessment of mental health issues, should be a prerequisite for undertaking masters-level programs in positive psychology. In terms of creating psychologically literate students or citizens, these findings also support the argument for including positive psychology topics in an UG curriculum where students can be exposed to a broader base of psychology, and in particular have the opportunity to critique any “happiness” or “well-being” programs that may be offered in their children’s schools, their own or their partner’s organization, or in their wider community more generally. PPIs, as the research suggests, seem promising, but further research is obviously required. Reliable and valid PPIs may assist in increasing well-being and potentially achieve savings in mental health costs. It is also useful to note that a


125

growing number of people are attracted to wider models of health maintenance (illness prevention) and fewer medical-style interventions (Eisenberg et al., 1998) and PPIs would meet this need.

Positive Psychology and the Psychologically Literate Citizen So far we have argued that those developing tertiary curricula should embrace positive psychology to assist with creating a broader psychological literacy for students. In terms of creating psychologically literate citizens, we would argue that positive psychology provides a key body of knowledge on which “psychologically literate citizens can solve problems in an ethical and socially responsible manner in a way that directly benefits their communities,” as Cranney and Dunn suggested in Chapter 1. In fact, many students attracted to study positive psychology do not only wish to “feel good” but to “do good” and become virtuous citizens. We suggest that positive psychology has significant relevance to the concept of the psychologically literate citizen, given that there are an increasing number of people from diverse backgrounds being drawn to positive psychology who wish to make a difference or leave a positive legacy in the world. There are many examples where “applied positive psychology” can have significant practical and social relevance in education (e.g., Madden, Green & Grant, 2011; Fox Eades, 2008), organizations (Linley, Harrington, & Garcea, 2010), and communities. Positive psychology may also provide a rich knowledge base of what defines a “global citizen,” which has been simply defined as “anyone who works to make the world a better place” (Victoria International Development Education Association, n.d.). Citizenship is one of the character strengths of the virtue of justice (Peterson & Seligman, 2004) and fits appropriately within the ‘global citizen’ definition. Psychologically literate citizens, with a rich knowledge of virtues and strengths, may, as Cranney and colleagues (2008) suggested, become the stewards to help ensure the survival of the planet and to actively contribute to the betterment of all peoples, this being one of the core tenets of positive psychology. University driven research plays a crucial role in measuring outcomes and recommending evidence-based interventions to assist in achieving these outcomesPsychological literacy encapsulates the common graduate attributes or capabilities that students should acquire while undertaking a major in psychology, as exemplified by the guidelines and lists of student learning outcomes (SLOs) delineated by many national psychology organizations (e.g., Halpern, 2010, in the United States of America, and Cranney et al., 2008, in Australia). As such, it would behoove educators to broaden their own knowledge of positive psychology in order to expand their curriculum to encompass research that broadly covers positive psychology as the science of optimal functioning and include topics on positive emotions, strengths, engagement, and meaning. As positive psychology has as its complementary partner “applied positive psychology,” there are many resources and examples that can be used for the teaching

126


and learning of students in UG and postgraduate programs. For example, Seligman’s “Authentic Happiness” website (www.authentichappiness.org) offers free membership and includes access to numerous positive psychology assessments and resources.

Suggestions and Resources to Facilitate the Development of Psychological literacy in UG Psychology Courses • Provide a brief introduction to the field of positive psychology and its key theories, models, and areas of research and practice. Key theories include Broaden and Build Theory (Fredrickson, 1998, 2001), Hope Theory (Snyder et al., 1991), Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), and Authentic Happiness Theory (Seligman, 2003). • Provide students with relevant introductory positive psychology texts (e.g., Baumgardner & Crothers, 2009; Compton, 2004; Peterson, 2006) and credible positive psychology books such as Happier by Ben-Shahar (2007) and The How of Happiness by Lyubomirsky (2008). These books include activities that are meant to illustrate positive psychology in action and enable students to take the tools with them for use in daily life, long after the course is completed. • Provide students with opportunities to view films and video clips that portray the virtues and strengths in action. For example, Positive Psychology at the Movies (Niemiec & Wedding, 2008) is a highly recommended resource. • Provide students with opportunities for experiential learning and applications to self, others, and community (e.g., review meta-analysis on PPIs [Sin & Lyubomirksy, 2009] and then apply strategies to self). Such practical applications do not require the student to be a professional psychologist; however, with a combination of science (knowledge and skill practice in class) and opportunities for practical application, students may be in a position to offer PPI guidance to others in the community, in their workplace, and in their families. • Provide adequate discussion of the perils and pitfalls of positive psychology—that is, the dangers of PPIs with a vulnerable population conducted by non-psychologists. Alternatively, consider how “too much” positive psychology might pose problems for the discipline by discussing the possible benefits of studying the negative alongside the positive.

Conclusions “Psychologically literate citizens use their psychological literacy to solve proÂ� blems in an ethical and socially responsible manner in a way that directly benefits


127

their communities. That is, they selflessly and sometimes courageously share their psychological knowledge and skills to directly benefit their communities, large or small” (Cranney & Dunn, Chapter 1 of this volume). This would seem to be the overall objective of the positive psychology student and future citizen. It is the authors’ observation and experience that most students are drawn to study positive psychology to make a difference in their own life and in the lives of others. Given that many are studying positive psychology as graduate students, they may already hold positions of influence and are able to use these positions to create positive change either locally or globally. We echo Cranney and coworkers’ (2008) comments that in a global world, psychologists must educate many public audiences. Many of the younger students will wish to apply their learning, and given the practical focus of positive psychology and its usefulness in schools (see Seligman et al., 2009), organizations (see Linley, Harrington, & Garcea, 2010), and in communities (see Diener et al., 2009), psychological literacy that includes positive psychology is essential. In conclusion, we support McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) call to action: “Psychologists have built effective programs to achieve and measure the literacy outcomes. Is it now time to make the commitment to educate themselves and their students as psychologically literate citizens and to engage in new scholarship on teaching and learning [which we would argue includes positive psychology] to discover how best to achieve this outcome?” (p. 25; text in brackets added) Given the community’s significant interest in increasing physical and mental fitness and, as Cranney and colleagues (2008) suggest, the universal demands for citizens’ well-being and quality healthcare, we also would argue that there needs to be a greater commitment by psychologists, particularly those in academia, to be leaders in research and advice to government and communities on best practice on achieving those good ends.

References Australian Psychological Society. (2011). Coaching Psychology Interest Group. http:// www.groups.psychology.org.au/igcp/ (accessed March 2011). Baumgardner, S., & Crothers, M. (2009). Positive psychology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Ben-Shahar, T. (2007). Happier: learn the secrets to daily joy and lasting fulfillment. New York: McGraw-Hill. Biswas-Diener, R., & Dean, B. (2007). Positive psychology coaching: putting the science of happiness to work for your clients. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Compton, W. C. (2004). Introduction to positive psychology. New York: Wadsworth. Cranney, J., Provost, S., Katsikitis, M., Martin, F., White, F., & Cohen, L. (2008). Designing a diverse, future-oriented vision for undergraduate psychology in Australia. Strawberry

128


Hills, New South Wales, AU: Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd. Available at http://altc.edu.au/Carrick/go/home/grants/pid/343. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J. F. (2009). Wellbeing for public policy. New York: Oxford University Press. Ehrenreich, B. (2009). Bright-sided: how positive thinking is undermining America. New York: Metropolitan Books. Eisenberg, D. M., Davis, R. B., Ettner, S. L., Appel, S., Wilkey, S., van Rampay, M., & Kessler, R. (1998). Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990–1997. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280(18), 1569–1575. Fox Eades, J. (2008). Celebrating strengths: building strengths-based schools. UK: Capp Press. Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General PsyÂ� chology, 2, 300–319. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–226. Gable, S. L., & Haidt, J. (2005). What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of General Psychology, 9, 103–110. Green, L. S., Oades, L. G., & Grant, A. M. (2006). Cognitive-behavioural, solution focused life coaching: enhancing goal striving, well-being and hope. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 142–149. Halpern, D. F. (Ed.). (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Held, B. S. (2002). The tyranny of the positive attitude in America: observation and speculation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58, 965–991. Joseph, S., & Linley, P. A. (2006). Positive therapy: a meta-theory for positive psychological practice. New York: Routledge. Kauffman, C. (2006). Positive psychology: the science at the heart of coaching. In D. R. Stober & A. M. Grant (Eds.), Evidence based coaching handbook: putting best practices to work for your clients (pp. 219–253). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. Kemp, T., & Green, L. S. (2010). Executive coaching for the normal “non-clinical” population: fact or fiction? Paper presented at the Fourth Australian Conference on EvidenceBased Coaching, University of Sydney. Keyes, C. (2007). Promoting and protecting mental health as flourishing: a complementary strategy for improving national mental health. American Psychologist, 62, 95–108. Lazarus, R. S. (2003). Does the positive psychology movement have legs? Psychological Inquiry, 14, 93–109. Linley, P. A., Harrington, S., & Garcea, N. (Eds.) (2010). Handbook of positive psychology and work. New York: Oxford University Press. Linley, P. A., & Joseph, S. (2004). Applied positive psychology: a new perspective for professional practice. In P.A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 3–12). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). The how of happiness: a practical approach to getting the life you want. London: Piatkus. Madden, W., Green, S. & Grant, A. M. (2011). A pilot study evaluating strengths-based coaching for primary school students: enhancing engagement and hope. International Coaching Psychology Review, 6(1), 71–83.


129

Maslow, A. H. (1987). Motivation and personality. New York: HarperCollins. (Original work published 1954). McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 9–27). Washington, D.C .: American Psychological Society. Miller, G. A. (1969). Psychology as a means of protecting human welfare. American Psychologist, 24, 1063–1075. Myers, D. G., & Diener, E., (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 10–19. Niemiec, R. M., & Wedding, D. (2008). Positive psychology at the movies: using films to build virtues and character strengths. Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe. Noble, T., & McGrath, H. (2008). The positive educational practices framework: a tool for facilitating the work of educational psychologists in promoting pupil wellbeing. Educational and Child Psychology, 25, 119–134. Peterson, C. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: a handbook and classification. New York: Oxford University Press. Robbins, B. D. (2008). What is the good life? Positive psychology and the renaissance of humanistic psychology. Humanistic Psychologist, 36, 96–112. Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Positive psychology network concept paper. Retrieved June 22, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.psych.upenn.edu/seligman/ ppgrant.html. Seligman, M. E. P. (2003). The past and future of positive psychology. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. xi–xx). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Seligman, M. E. P. (2007). Coaching and positive psychology. Australian Psychologist, 42(4), 266–267. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: an introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14. Seligman, M., Ernst, R., Gillham, K., & Linkins, M. (2009). Positive education: positive psychology and classroom interventions. Oxford Review of Education, 35(3), 293–311. Seligman, M., Steen, T., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421. Sheldon, K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How to increase and sustain positive emotion: the effects of expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 73–82. Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: a practice-friendly meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology: In Session, 65, 467–487. Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M., Sigmon, S. T., et al. (1991). The will and the ways: development and validation of an individualdifferences measure of hope. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 570–585. Spence, G. B., & Grant, A. M. (2007). Professional and peer life coaching and the enhancement of goal striving and well-being: an exploratory study. Journal of Positive Psychology, 2, 185–194.

130


Victoria International Development Education Association (2011). What is a global citizen? http://www.videa.ca/global/citizen.html. (Accessed March 2011). Wilson, E. G. (2008). Against happiness: in praise of melancholy. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux. Woolfolk, R. L. (2002). The power of negative thinking: truth, melancholia, and the tragic sense of life. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 22, 19–27.

10 Departmental Program Approaches for Educating Psychologically Literate Citizens Jane S. Halonen, Dana S. Dunn, Suzanne Baker, and Maureen A. McCarthy

A

colleague1 offered the perfect (albeit humorous) explanation for why experience in psychology should be a requirement for a college education. Although one can point to almost any department’s set of lofty goals to justify this claim, his approach was much simpler: “You should study psychology so you won’t be a jerk.” (We do not mean to be flippant by quoting our colleague: his counsel to avoid being a foolish or annoying person—one who is not considerate of the needs of others—is sound.) The desired outcomes of an undergraduate education in psychology were recently the focus of a chapter in Education in Psychology: A Blueprint for the Future of the Discipline (Halpern, 2010) in which the authors (McGovern et al., 2010) proposed the term psychological literacy. Their intention was to coin a “powerful but unifying concept” that would take into account the emerging agreement of the long-term intellectual gains students should make as the result of their exposure to high-quality undergraduate courses in psychology. Although the focus of their chapter reflected the bias that is typical in most programs of psychology (i.e., what does this mean from the standpoint of completion of the major?), the time is ripe for the broad adoption of a framework that will integrate diverse approaches designed to address demonstrable gains as students master psychological ways of interpreting their experience. Facilitating the development of psychologically literate citizens seems to fit well with the variety of documents produced in the United States and sponsored by the American Psychological Association that address curriculum standards. In order of their emergence, these include the National Standards for High School Psychology (APA, 2005); the Guidelines for Undergraduate Psychology Programs (APA, 2007), and Teaching, Learning, and Assessing in a Developmentally Coherent Curriculum (APA, 2008; see also Dunn et al., 2010a, 2010b; Dunn, 1. Bruce Henderson, Western Carolina University.

132

T h e P sych o l o gically L it e r at e C iti z e n

Cautin, & Gurung, this volume). This approach is consistent with other works emerging on the international stage, such as those in Europe and Australia (e.g., Cranney et al., 2009; Lunt, 2008). The characteristic learning achievements targeted by McGovern and colleagues (2010) define the skill set and characteristics that make up psychological literacy. For our purposes, we have reorganized and clustered these outcomes to produce some larger domains of expertise, as follows: • Content • Demonstration of a well-defined vocabulary • Demonstration of basic knowledge of critical subject matter • Values • Valuing scientific thinking • Acting ethically • Critical-Thinking Skills • Analyzing information in a disciplined manner • Emphasizing alternative explanations • Solving problems through creative and amiable skepticism • Information Management • Using and evaluating information • Using technology appropriately • Interaction Skills • Communicating effectively in different modes with different audiences • Recognizing and fostering respect for diversity • Application Skills • Applying psychological principles in everyday life • Demonstrating insight and reflection about behavior of self and others These goals provide guidance to any department that seriously chooses to embrace the unifying concept of psychological literacy; however, we suggest that from a programmatic standpoint, implementation is devilishly difficult. Every psychology program delivers a curriculum to at least four distinctive groups of undergraduate students (i.e., no training in the discipline, experience in introductory psychology, developing students, advanced majors). We hypothesize that each group has different needs and motivations that require a multi-layered way of looking at psychological literacy. Meeting the needs of such diversity requires some attention to the expectations of literacy that might reasonably apply to each level of student. According to Halonen and colleagues (2003), people who have never had exposure to psychology think about the world in characteristic ways. Those patterns predictably don’t correspond to the elements of literacy as outlined by McGovern and colleagues (2010). As just one example, people who have not studied psychology may be more inclined to be reflexive than reflective in interpreting their experience. They have little reason to doubt the validity of their intuition and don’t particularly feel any drive to validate or even question their experience.

Departmental Program Approaches for Educating Psychologically Literate Citizens

133

Glancing at virtually any tabloid can often reveal how vulnerable those who are psychologically untrained may be to outrageous behavioral claims (e.g., Weekly World News claims “sneezing increases bust size”). Being unaware of the multiple and complex factors that influence behavior, attitudes, and cognitions (both their own and those of others) may lead them to make harmful or hurtful errors in judgment, attribution, and action. The next category addresses the millions of students who take one course in psychology. Their experiences vary. As any introductory psychology teacher knows, the course will be populated with some students who have no genuine interest in the course content. They may have selected psychology because they think it will be a non-taxing way to meet a general education requirement and “get it out of the way.” As a consequence, regardless of the talents of the introductory teacher, they may render minimal effort in the hopes of “getting by” and are unlikely to be transformed in any manner that seriously reflects the development of psychological literacy. In essence, at the conclusion of the course the unmotivated student looks a lot like one who has never taken a course. However, successful students who take introductory psychology, whether it is a college-level course or a high school course, will show tangible intellectual benefits from their one-course exposure to psychology. The vast majority will not pursue additional education in the discipline. Even in the confines of a single course, should we not expect that competently prepared introductory students will reasonably develop some aspects of psychological literacy and be able to benefit long term from their learning? As shown in Table 10.1, we consider students who have achieved success at the introductory level to be able to demonstrate “Level 1 psychological literacy.” A second category of students are those who are sufficiently drawn to psychology to pursue more in-depth study, but for whatever reason resist making a commitment to a full-blown major. These students enjoy the ambiance of the major but probably feel uncomfortable with some of the more challenging aspects imposed by the major (e.g., statistics, experimental design, courses in the biological foundations of behavior). They are conversant in psychology but not adept at the full range of analytic skills honed in the major. They can engage in psychological ways of thinking but rely on the frameworks of psychology to functionally enrich or enhance their selected major. We characterize their development in psychological literacy as “Level 2 literacy.” One could also imagine that Level 2 is an intermediate stage in the development of a major. Those who elect to major in psychology represent a decided challenge for departments. Majors tend to sort themselves into two groups, sometimes supported by separate curricular tracks within the major: those who plan to continue their training in graduate school, either in psychology or some other field such as law or medicine, and those who plan to seek employment directly after graduation. Faculty members often express the belief that academically stronger students will naturally favor a graduate school destiny and faculty regularly demonstrate a marked preference for working with perceived higher-caliber students. In fact,

Table 10.1â•‡ Key Domains of Psychology Literacy

No Exposure

Level 1 Literacy: Intro Course in Psychology

Level 2 Literacy: Minor in Psychology

Level 3 Literacy: Psychology Major: Baccalaureate Terminal

Level 4 Literacy: Psychology Major: Grad School-Bound

Mastery of vocabulary

Describes psychology concepts as alien, burdensome, irrelevant, and/or unnecessary

Develops low-level but serviceable psychological vocabulary

Describes psychological phenomena with appropriate concepts

Develops functional psychology concept maps

Develops rich, nuanced psychology concept maps

Mastery of critical subject matter

Assumes that psychology focuses solely on behavior disorders

Recognizes major theories and orientations

Discusses advantages and limitations of theories and orientations

Demonstrates theoretical depth in selected areas of study

Commits to preferred subdiscipline and frameworks as a career path

CONTENT

VALUES Value of scientific thinking

Recognizes that Fails to recognize that psychology strives psychology has to follow scientific scientific foundations principles

Describes advantages of Can discuss and use Relies on scientific approaches scientific approaches scientific approaches in (psychological (psychological problem solving science) in problem science) in problem solving solving

Acting ethically

Accepts unchallenged Identifies obvious assumptions about ethical protections ethics based on media, and violations in stereotypes ethical practice

Can identify ethical Accepts and practices aspects of psychological ethical norms that issues that pertain to govern applications major

Embraces ethical codes of conduct for the profession

Identifies and implements Develops systematic limited strategies to strategies to analyze overcome bias and information distortion

Demonstrates vigilance about disciplined analysis of information

CRITICAL THINKING Recognizes that personal bias and cognitive error can distort conclusions

Disciplined analysis of information

Accepts behavioral claims with little or no systematic analysis

Emphasis on alternative explanations

Prematurely settles Accepts the value of conclusions based on generating intuition and personal alternative experience explanations

Creative and Views problems as amiable obstacles to be skepticism in addressed quickly problem solving through personal protocols

Can apply simple problem-solving protocols to behavioral puzzles

Generates alternative explanations with prompting

Can generate alternative Habitually generates explanations without alternative prompting explanations

Develops problem-solving Views problems as strategies that reflect opportunity for deploying psychological concepts, psychological tools values

Views problems as opportunity to use depth of training and exercise creativity

(Continued)


No Exposure

Level 1 Literacy: Intro Course in Psychology

Level 2 Literacy: Minor in Psychology

Level 3 Literacy: Psychology Major: Baccalaureate Terminal

Level 4 Literacy: Psychology Major: Grad School-Bound

INFORMATION MGT Use and evaluation Fails to apply of information standards of quality to information sources

Identifies that Navigates psychological information sources information sources can differ in value functionally and bias

Accepts and rejects Builds high-quality data sources based information caches to on quality criteria in support complex discipline ideas

Use and evaluation Shows no awareness of of technology relation between psychology and technology

Uses basic technologies to address simple problems when prompted

Uses appropriate technology to address complex problems

Uses appropriate technology to address complex problems

Incorporates psychological perspectives into communication

Tailors communiÂ� cation to context but gives priority to psychology audience

Uses domain-specific technologies appropriately

INTERACTION SKILLS Multimodal, multi-audience communication

Expresses ideas with little regard to context or audience

Recognizes that Explores different different contexts modes of communiÂ� may require different cation related to major and minor modes of communication

Diversity skills

May show little regard for the value of individual and cultural differences

Identifies how ingroup/ Recognizes value of and outgroup dynamics experiments with influence attitudes effective communiÂ� toward “others” cation strategies with others

Application of psychology in everyday life

Navigates everyday life without benefit of psychology concepts

Applies psychology concepts that produce personal benefits

Applies broader range of Routinely relies on Shows interest in psychology concepts to psychology concepts developing concepts produce personal and to navigate personal to enrich everyday professional benefits and professional life life

Demonstration of insight and reflection

Operates in environÂ� ment with little insight or reflection

Exercises insight and reflection when prompted to do so

Shows some indepenÂ� dence in insight and reflection

Pursues meaningful Pursues meaningful exposure to others to exposure to others to enrich experience enrich professional competence

APPLICATION

Systematically Ponders problems to incorporates insight, produce highestreflection time to quality solutions improve solution quality

138


some faculty claim to be ignorant about how to advise students who stop at the baccalaureate level about job futures. Life circumstances may prevent genuinely gifted students from committing the time, energy, and personal resources to developing greater expertise and capturing additional degrees in the discipline. Other students who are equally academically proficient may find themselves drawn to a career that does not require graduate training. However, the two-tiered major has implications for how we attempt to promote psychological literacy, as the skill sets differ for those who will be seeking employment (Level 3 literacy) rather than a spot in graduate school (Level 4 literacy). We propose that departments can use the psychological literacy concept as an organizer to meet the disparate needs of the different kinds of citizens that psychology students are striving to become. As a consequence, we should develop a multi-layered approach to psychological literacy that takes those differences into account. We propose a benchmarking strategy that produces developmental expectations of psychological literacy for the various levels of students served by psychology departments (Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, Halonen, & Hill, 2007; see also Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, & Halonen, 2011). Embracing this approach will also entail specific implications for department planning, which we will address in the conclusion of the section.

Level 1 Literacy: Introductory Course in Psychology Departments that embrace the psychological literacy paradigm must think through what literacy should entail after only a term’s experience in the discipline. Certainly we should not expect that new students will achieve all of the optimal outcomes desired by McGovern and colleagues (2010) at the conclusion of the first experience. Indeed, a substantial portion of students may cruise on through their introductory experience with little long-lasting impact that would correspond to the goals stated for the psychologically literate. However, embracing the goal of literacy as an organizer for curriculum design carries with it some significant implications for how the department should structure and deliver the course (see Chapter 2, this volume). How do we move students from the characteristic ways of thinking shown by those without exposure to psychology to the novice psychological thinker? Level l literacy should produce a functional understanding of the way that psychological concepts communicate efficiently about psychological phenomena. For example, students enjoy learning that the occasional incapacity to recall an appropriate word or concept is called “the tip of the tongue” phenomenon, and that research psychologists have proposed ways to explain how the phenomenon works (e.g., Biedermann, Ruh, Nickles, & Coltheart, 2008; Shafto, Burke, Stamatakis, Tam, & Tyler, 2007). Another example is that good students learn to distinguish “negative reinforcement” from “punishment” accurately. In summary, they enjoy


139

being able to precisely label the psychological phenomena that they have experienced in their own lives. Before the course, students in introductory psychology are often startled to learn that psychologists have “issues” about not being recognized as scientists; they tend to believe that “psychologist” = “therapist.” Scientific persuasion transpires through the disciplined review of concepts in the methods chapter of the course text, where students learn the value of controlled comparisons; the dreaded, slippery terminology of design (e.g., independent and dependent variable); and the overwhelming numbers of research studies that often lead to conflicting conclusions. They are often surprised to learn that ethics matter to psychologists. At the end of the course, however, they should be able to recount basic research and practice ethical principles that foster protection for research participants and clients alike. Fostering doubt in automatic conclusions is a starting point for the introductory psychology curriculum. Students must be persuaded that skepticism serves a purpose; they often struggle with abandoning simpler reflexive forms of thinking for the more cognitively taxing forms of critical thinking that psychology requires. Many content areas in introductory psychology facilitate critical thinking growth (e.g., Dunn, Halonen, & Smith, 2008). Learning about defense mechanisms, social and perceptual biases, and cognitive errors can assist students to understand that human cognitive processes are error-prone, and they begin to take some steps to be less vulnerable to such errors. Beginning psychology students struggle with the concept of discriminating high-quality information from data of lesser or even dubious quality. They may be inclined to be uncritical of information shared by anyone who seems authoritative or an expert. They also may have to overcome the uncritical tendency of accepting anything “on the Internet” as gospel. Introducing the hierarchy of quality sources by disallowing some lesser-quality forms in written research can underscore the value added for information that has been peer-reviewed. Students may also be introduced to psychology databases, which should expedite their pursuit of highquality information. When students read psychological literature for the first time, they are sometimes flummoxed at the complexity of the material. Realizing that the literature is written for the audience of professional and academic psychologists helps students begin to sort through the manner in which communication is contextual. Communication success depends on understanding the impact of different sociocultural contexts, as well. Sociocultural experiences promote recognition of diversity among humans, whether by discipline, occupation, gender, or heritage. The content of social psychology further assists students to recognize how attitudes develop, especially about those who seem not to share our experiences, backgrounds, or cultures. Novice psychological thinkers can successfully apply psychology concepts to develop greater insight into their personal situations. However, the likelihood that this will happen is enhanced when course instructors prompt that activity through

140


essay questions, journal entries, or other strategies that promote personal application and exploration. Although some insight and reflection may develop as a consequence of the power of the psychological tools, such metacognitive gains will be enhanced where assignments incorporate application, insight, and reflection as explicit goals.

Implication for Department Planning Students can experience introductory psychology as overwhelming. Burgeoning numbers of studies and increasing specializations in psychology can bewilder the novice learner. Comprehensive textbooks often compel introductory instructors to “cover the content” rather than attend to the development of psychological skills and dispositions. Departments can review the dimensions of literacy that seem to fit best with their mission and vision, and establish some common practices to achieve the selected outcomes. The ideal introductory course, then, may sacrifice some areas of content and reallocate course time to project work that will meet these more applied goals. Strategies for making judicious choices about selection of topical material can be found in the high school standards, which are readily applicable to the undergraduate-level course (see APA, 2005).

Level 2 Literacy: Minor or Concentration in Psychology Although there is no national standard about what constitutes a legitimate minor or concentration in psychology, we recognize that the minor is often implemented as “psychology lite.” Minimally, Dunn et al. (2010a, 2010b) suggest that the minor should include introductory psychology as well as coursework in research methods and data analysis. Beyond that, students will benefit from course material from the core areas of the discipline (i.e., biological bases of behavior, sociocultural, developmental, learning and cognition; see Dunn et al., 2010a, 2010b). In many psychology minors, the reality is that many students elect to take specialized content courses that seem to correspond most closely to their personal interests or to their chosen major. They may or may not have to develop a statistical understanding of research studies or complete hands-on work in methods. In contrast with major requirements, the minor is unlikely to require that students engage in an integrative capstone project that represents a work of specified depth and independence (c.f., Dunn et al., 2010a, 2010b). What, then, is the value added by additional coursework in psychology that doesn’t rise to the level of the major? In Level 2 literacy, the psychology minor develops the ability to apply psychological frameworks more broadly to more complex problems. Students develop some appreciation of the value and constraints of theories in general but may not be particularly keen to


141

analyze theory. They are simply more interested in what gains can be made by using the content. Psychology minors may accept that the discipline has a scientific base but may not particularly like it that way. They may be less interested in exercising the rigor that science imposes. Their understanding of ethical norms in psychology is enriched where such judgments overlap with their major discipline. For example, a nursing major may be more keenly interested in the ethical challenges associated with patient care than with research protocols. With repeated practice applying psychological frameworks across multiple courses, psychology minors demonstrate increasing comfort with the stance of generating evidence to support behavioral claims. They recognize that betterquality solutions will derive from thoughtful and disciplined approaches that tap multiple perspectives. Although not dominated by psychological frameworks, their solutions will reflect psychological concepts and values. Courses at advanced levels in psychology are often project-driven. Students who have a minor in psychology typically incorporate specified technologies and databases to manage the information required in any higher-level project. They can readily navigate information but may not always exercise the best judgment about what represents high-quality information. Minors enjoy the edge that psychology gives them in interaction with others. Psychology maintains some mystique since the untrained often assume that education in psychology allows the practitioner to “read minds.” The real edge that psychology provides is the likelihood that accumulated experience will refine their ability to explain behavior somewhat more objectively and to empathize with others who are not like themselves. Being able to anticipate the needs of audiences will also produce some success in crafting communications for different audiences. With practice, students who minor in psychology develop some expertise in making use of psychology frameworks in ways that specifically enhance their ability to execute their majors. Although the applications may not be deep or complex, they will be functional. In addition, successful work will show increasing independence in the choices the student makes in project execution.

Implication for Department Planning Departments rarely explicitly consider the needs of minors, even though these students may contribute a considerable portion of student credit hours to their enrollment. However, there may be value in examining the kinds of project demands that are made at the advanced level to determine if these effectively provide the enrichment addressed at Level 2 literacy. To realize literacy goals, the options that students should be able to choose from should have some common elements. For example, advanced coursework should be project-intensive, which would allow minors ample opportunity to develop information-management and critical-thinking skills. To the extent that

142


the projects have the capability of being shaped formally to support the students’ major, the goals related to professional enhancement can be more readily achieved (see Dunn et al., 2010a, 2010b). For example, students enrolled in an abnormal psychology course might complete a project exploring how they will apply the course content in their future careers. Students might be asked to identify the likely psychological illnesses that they might encounter in a work setting, describe the limitations to working with people with psychological illness, and propose mechanisms for serving the person effectively (e.g., community resources).

Levels 3 and 4 Literacy: Terminal Baccalaureate and Graduate School-Bound We are going to make some assumptions that distinguish the terminal baccalauÂ� reate student (Level 3 literacy) from the graduate school-bound student (Level 4 literacy). In general, students who are grad school-bound have a better-defined vision of where their degrees will take them. As a consequence, these students tend to be more committed, more hard-working, and more enterprising in their individual pursuits. They show a strong preference for doing psychology (e.g., designing studies, interviewing clients, conducting statistical analyses) rather than simply benefiting from the insights that psychology might provide. Their exuberance goes a long way to explain why many faculty feel more at home with the grad schoolbound student. Although both groups develop psychological stores of knowledge that are bound to be more extensive than minors will acquire, the terminal student is more likely to emphasize functionality in the content pursued. Conceptual depth is most likely to be developed as a matter of meeting course requirements and planning for a subsequent career than as responding to a calling of the heart. Both groups have a higher level of understanding about the rationale for ethical codes of behavior (e.g., APA, 2002) than minors might acquire. However, since terminal students are unlikely to be engaged in formal practices that involve ethical protection, they may not be as interested in developing expertise in the ethical dimensions of the discipline. However, grad students recognize that they will have Institutional Review Board or animal care and use protocols, or patients’ rights and concerns, to consider in their future. As a consequence, they are more likely to attend to practical details of ethical codes of conduct. Skepticism becomes a tool for the major; purposeful doubt serves to promote the pursuit of alternative explanations. Attempting to disprove ideas becomes a tool that can lead to refined conclusions and better outcomes. The degree of vigilance about critical thinking is likely to vary between the two types of majors; however, both groups recognize that the success of their efforts will depend on the generation of defensible hypotheses and high-quality evidence to support their claims. At the conclusion of the major, both groups should be able to navigate information sources with a high degree of competence. The graduate school-bound


143

student is more likely to develop conceptual networks with an eye toward having them available and accessible to support future work requirements; however, both groups practice applying the use of appropriate criteria to make judgments about what kind of information to accept and to dismiss. Both groups develop similar kinds of expertise in using and evaluating technology. Interaction skills are likely to differ only subtly between the groups. Both will have experienced various kinds of communication modes designed to appeal to different audiences. However, graduate school-bound students are going to give priority to the professional psychology audience. As such, they will develop greater mastery of APA format (APA, 2010). Both groups recognize the value of being able to interact effectively; however, the grad school-bound group may display higher motivation to improve their cultural competence in interacting with people who do not share their characteristics (e.g., future clients). Both terminal baccalaureate and graduate school-bound students develop expertise in applying psychological frameworks to everyday life. However, the motives of the terminal student might be particularly focused on vocational success. For example, how does expertise in psychology translate to being a more effective manager, teacher, or public servant? Although capable of applying psychological concepts to regular life, the graduate school-bound student will be more driven to join the scholarly effort to develop concepts that more fully explain behavior. Both groups will have developed some metacognitive strategies that promote careful consideration, exploration, and evaluation before reaching conclusions.

Implication for Department Planning Departments would benefit from conducting an audit about the degree to which departmental planning may be driven and dominated by the preparation requirements of the graduate school-bound student. Some changes may be needed to optimize the literacy of psychology majors of all stripes. • Projects should be inventoried to determine that a reasonable scope of communication modes results. Where do students give speeches? Make poster presentations? Collaborate on group reports? • Project options in advanced classes could be examined to determine if there is much emphasis on vocational preparation. If not, how could additional options reasonably be included to promote sturdier job candidates? • What department standards have been established for high-level, effective writing? Has the department adopted a style sheet? Are APAstyle papers required in some or all courses above the one where the skill is introduced (usually research methods)? • How does the department ensure that appropriate technologies (e.g., PowerPoint, statistical software) will be experienced, regardless of the students’ future?

144


• What could departments do to test ethical understanding rather than assuming ethics are intact until proven otherwise? • Advanced work might entail metacognitive addenda in which students reflect on their accomplishments and verify their ability to make explicit links with relevant psychological frameworks. • At some point in the major, students should have project work that guarantees interaction with an identified “other,” such as a peer, a professional working in or outside the discipline, or a client (e.g., an individual in a homeless shelter), but particularly an individual whose life circumstances differ substantially from those of the students. • Can a capstone experience provide the proper vehicle for measuring student progress? Students enrolled in their final course should be able to demonstrate advanced skills and ways of thinking that are characteristic of psychologically literate citizens (see Dunn et al., 2010a).

Conclusions In this chapter, we have presented a framework for psychological literacy across various domains for students with differing levels of formal coursework experience in the discipline. The next challenge is developing ways of assessing the skills these students take with them into their future. Likewise, the challenge for departments of psychology is to think seriously about psychology literacy for all of their students, including those who take only one, or a few, psychology courses. As educators who care deeply about our discipline and believe it has much to contribute to the greater good, how can we ensure that students have the skills to use their psychological knowledge to help them make good choices and contribute to their communities? This is an exciting time to be a psychology educator, as we see the discipline move toward a greater appreciation of devoting serious time to the development of skill sets for undergraduate students. The concept of “psychological literacy” may provide the right common framework to engender the kind of departmental discussions that lead to curricular transformation. We look forward to the discussions that lie ahead.

References American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073. American Psychological Association. (2005). National standards for high school psychology curricula. Washington, D. C.: Author. Retrieved Feb. 15, 2007, from http://www. apa.org/ed/natlstandards.html. American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Retrieved April 11, 2010, from http://www.apa.org/ed/psymajor_ guideline.pdf.


145

American Psychological Association. (2008). Teaching, learning, and assessing in a developmentally coherent curriculum. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, Board of Educational Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/ governance/bea/curriculum.pdf. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, D. C.: Author. Biedermann, B., Ruh, N., Nickels, L., & Coltheart, M. (2008). Information retrieval in tip of the tongue states: new data and methodological advances. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 37, 171–198. Cranney, J., Turnbull, C., Provost, S. C., Martin, F., Katsikitis, M., White, F. A., Voudouris, N. J., Montgomery, I. M., Heaven, P. C. L., Morris, S., & Varcin, K. J. (2009). Graduate attributes of the 4-year Australian undergraduate psychology program. Australian Psychologist, 44, 253–262. doi: 10.1080/00050060903037268. Dunn, D. S., Beins, B. C., McCarthy, M. A., & Hill, G. W., IV. (Eds.). (2010a). Best practices for teaching beginnings and endings in the psychology major: research, cases, and recommendations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010b). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Dunn, D. S., Cautin, R. L., & Gurung, R. A. R. (in press). Curriculum matters: Structure, content, and psychological literacy. To appear in J. S. Cranney & D. S. Dunn (Eds.), Educating the psychologically literate citizen: Global perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press. Dunn, D. S., Halonen, J. S., & Smith, R. A. (Eds.) (2008). Teaching critical thinking in psychology: a handbook of best practices. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Dunn, D. S., McCarthy, M. A., Baker, S. C., & Halonen, J. S. (2011). Using quality benchmarks for assessing and developing undergraduate programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dunn, D. S., McCarthy, M., Baker, S., Halonen, J. S., & Hill, G. W., IV. (2007). Quality benchmarks in undergraduate psychology programs. American Psychologist, 62, 650–670. Halonen, J. S., Bosack, T., Clay, S., & McCarthy, M. (with Dunn, D. S., Hill IV, G. W., McEntarffer, R., Mehrotra, C., Nesmith, R., Weaver, K., & Whitlock, K.) (2003). A rubric for authentically learning, teaching, and assessing scientific reasoning in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 196–208. Halpern, D. F. (Ed.). (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Lunt, I. (2008). Psychologist qualifications in Europe: common standard for quality and mobility. Australian Psychologist, 43, 222–230. doi: 10.1080/00050060802488026. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E., Jr., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Shafto, M. A., Burke, D. M., Stamatakis, E. A., Tam, P. P., & Tyler, L. K. (2007). On the tip-of-the-tongue: neural correlates of increased word-finding failures in normal aging. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 2060–2070.

11 Psychological Literacy and Applied Psychology in Undergraduate Education J a c q u e ly n C r a n n e y, S u e M o r r i s , F r a n c e s H . M a r t i n , S t e v e P r ov o s t, L u c y Z i n k i e w i c z , J o h n R e e c e , J o s e ph i n e M i l n e - H o m e , L o r e l l e J . B u r t o n , F i o n a A . Wh i t e , J u d i H o m e w o o d , Joanne k. Earl, and Sherri McCarthy

P

sychological literacy for the 21st century posits both real and virtual resource options for “applied” psychology at the interface of psychology education and graduate attribute-targeted student learning outcomes (SLOs). Psychological literacy encapsulates the common graduate attributes or capabilities that students should acquire while undertaking a major in psychology, as exemplified by guidelines and lists of SLOs delineated by many national psychology organizations (e.g., United States: APA, 2007; Australia: Cranney et al., 2008; Europe: Lunt et al., 2001). Application involves purposefully applying the basic capabilities to new problems or in new situations, usually in an experiential and active manner. In this chapter, we briefly consider the background to the issue of “applied” psychology in undergraduate (UG) education, and then give some concrete examples of how “applied” psychology learning and teaching (L&T) strategies can be implemented to support the development of psychological literacy (McGovern et al., 2010) in our students.

Background In Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom, education and training follows the “scientist-practitioner” or Boulder model, which has two components: (a) a graduate professional training component that emphasizes coursework, professional practice training, and research, and (b) the evidence-based practice of professionals and their continuing contribution to the science (Baker & Benjamin, 2000). Recent analysis of different international models of education and training (Cranney et al., 2008, 2009) suggests that an “applied” emphasis in UG education would enhance psychological literacy (see also Dunn et al., 2010,

Psychological Literacy and Applied Psychology in Undergraduate Education

147

who suggest at least one course in the UG curriculum should be applied in nature). Unfortunately, different understandings of what “applied” means hinder progress on this issue. Some assume that “applied” means professional training in psychology, and oppose this suggestion. Others assume the term means teaching for transference by applying psychological principles to phenomena encountered in the everyday world of students. Providing such examples in L&T activities makes the material more meaningful, understandable, and salient, thus increasing the probability that students will remember those principles (e.g., Badcock et al., 2007). Between these extremes there are numerous possibilities for what “applied” could mean in UG education. We here define “applied” psychology in the context of UG education to mean the successful application of psychological knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions (graduate attributes) to new problems and in new situations, whether this be in educational, personal, professional, or community contexts. This approach necessitates L&T strategies that are designed to be relevant to student experience, and in a currency that enhances memory and function. Three factors make consideration of the “applied” issue critical. The first is the large number of psychology major students who do not become professional psychologists (Halpern, 2010; Lipp et al., 2007; Upton & Trapp, 2010). What knowledge, skills, and attitudes (i.e., graduate attributes, which as McGovern et al. [2010] make clear, constitute “psychological literacy”) do these students take with them into diverse employment settings (Cranney et al., 2008)? How do graduates evaluate and use their psychological literacy? What impressions of psychology are they giving to their personal and professional associates? We have tended to ignore the needs of this large group of graduates (Lipp et al., 2007). OptiÂ�mizing psychology education would strengthen the science and profession of psychology, as these students are our ambassadors to the general public and are potential leaders in their communities (i.e., vanguards of the psychologically literate citizenry). The second issue is the growing shortage of health workers delivering psychological services (Hall & Altmaier, 2008). Thus there is external pressure to produce more psychologists more quickly, and so it becomes more important to identify L&T strategies that target the development of psychological literacy in our psychology major graduates. The third issue is that many current global problems, including climate change, racism, and terrorism, are clearly related to human behavior (Marsella, 2007; White, Chapter 5 in this volume). Appropriate education during adolescence, particularly in psychology, can help to prevent prejudice and terrorism (McCarthy, 2002). We need psychologically literate graduates who are motivated and competent to engage in solving real-life problems.

Examples of “Applied” Psychology in Relation to the Attributes that Constitute Psychological Literacy One way to operationalize “applied” psychology is through the strategic programming (Biggs & Tang, 2007) of the SLOs that constitute psychological literacy.

148

T he P s y chologically L iterate C iti z e n

Here we will focus on the Australian version (Cranney et al., 2009), which has significant overlap with the U.S. version (see also Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, Halonen, & Hill, 2007) and draws on listings such as the U.K. Benchmarking Exercise (Quality Assurance Agency, 2002) and EuroPsyT (Lunt et al., 2001). This list includes content knowledge, research methods, critical thinking, values, communication, and application. In the section below, for each of these graduate attributes, we list several SLOs and then present some examples of how “applied” could be interpreted for each of the graduate attributes. Emphasis is on studentcentered, active L&T strategies, with progressive development of SLOs, and “reallife” connections being made wherever possible. Readers are invited to adapt these examples to suit their own local educational context, with the aim of advancing the development of psychological literacy among their undergraduate students.

1. Knowledge and Understanding of Psychology Demonstrate understanding of the major concepts, theoretical perspectives, empirical findings, and historical trends in the core topics of psychology. Suggested Specific SLOs • Display basic knowledge and understanding of the following core topics: abnormal psychology; biological bases of behavior; cognition, information processing, and language; individual differences in capacity and behavior; testing and assessment; personality; learning; lifespan developmental psychology; motivation and emotion; perception; social psychology; history and philosophy of psychology; intercultural diversity, and indigenous psychology. • Demonstrate knowledge of the theoretical and empirical bases underpinning the construction, implementation, and interpretation of some of the most widely used cognitive and personality assessments. • Demonstrate knowledge of the theoretical and empirical bases underpinning evidence-based approaches to psychological intervention. • Delineate psychology as a scientific discipline and describe its major objectives. • Explain the major themes (e.g., interaction of genetics and environment) and perspectives (e.g., behavioral, evolutionary, sociocultural) of psychology. • Explain psychological phenomena using the concepts, language, and major theories of the discipline. Knowledge, and how it is acquired, is what defines the discipline. Our traditional L&T approach to content knowledge has been the large-lecture format,


149

assessed by a final examination. This approach is being fundamentally challenged and transformed by concurrent technological development and student demand for alternative delivery modes. Some examples of more student-centered and/or technologically innovative L&T “applied” approaches are given below. Example 1.1: Students’ Examples of the Application of Psychological Principles Design L&T activities where students are instructed to work in small groups to illustrate how a psychological principle is evident in everyday life; list three examples for whole-group discussion. Variation 1: Instruct students to (1) define a psychological principle, (2) review the literature for empirical support for the construct, then (3) find five examples from a range of settings (e.g., personal, interpersonal, and organizational). Prepare a 500-word online report for class review and discussion. Variation 2: Have students create summaries or tip sheets from research findings into application of psychological principles in the classroom (e.g., What evidence is there for the effective use of PowerPoint presentations in tertiary settings?). Variation 3: Have students analyze television advertisements for the application of learning principles (S. Provost, Southern Cross University). Variation 4: Arrange for small groups of students to visit sites such as elementary schools, elder-care facilities, detention centers, community health clinics, and day-care centers. Groups then report back to the class which principles they observed being applied (or which principles should have been applied) during their visits (S. McCarthy, Northern Arizona University-Yuma). Example 1.2: Developing an Understanding of Culture Australian universities have an increasingly culturally diverse student population, and the progressive development of cultural awareness, knowledge, and skill is critical to the development of the graduate attribute of global citizenry. One example of a L&T strategy is that first-year students develop a cultural diagram of their key cultural influences in life and use a reflective journal (see Example 6.3 below) to record their increasing understanding of that concept, including finding examples in everyday life (L. Burton, University of Southern Queensland). In this way, students explore their individual cultural identity in the context of various interactions with their peers and enhance self-awareness of cultural issues. Example 1.3: Behavior Modification of Self As part of their practical work, students apply a psychological principle to themselves. For example, they could each choose one of their own behaviors they wish to modify, and conduct a behavior modification procedure (i.e., N = 1 ABA intervention; J. Reece, RMIT University; Watson & Tharp, 2009), then present a case study in oral or written format for assessment. Variation 1: This approach has been used to help students to understand singlesubject designs, an empirical framework for case formulation with hypothesis

150


testing, as well as the advantages of multiple measures and linked interventions, and the use of visual aids to communicate progress (e.g., the use of the “10,000 steps” site for increasing exercise; weight loss using calorie counting journal sites; time and study management using Andrew Martin’s Motivation Wheel). It is best if students choose an issue relevant to their own priorities, as the exercise requires time, design, and data collection over the semester (J. Milne-Home, University of Western Sydney). Example 1.4: Professional Skill Training Some programs include counseling, interviewing, or test administration skills training in UG units, usually in the third or fourth year. This activity is obviously resource-intensive, and creative, low-cost approaches need to be developed (see Provost et al., 2010, for suggestions of possible role-playing and simulation approaches). The use of survey sites and tests is one way to illustrate the underpinnings of design, method, as well as the framing of interview/survey questions to minimize bias or response set. These communication skills for listening and cultivating an empathic inquiry mode are invaluable assets for social interactions and effective communication—these are life skills as well as applied psychology in everyday life (J. Milne-Home, University of Western Sydney).

2. Research Methods in Psychology Understand, apply, and evaluate basic research methods in psychology, including research design, data analysis and interpretation, and the appropriate use of technologies. Suggested Specific SLOs • Describe the basic characteristics of the science of psychology. • Describe, apply, and evaluate the different research methods used by psychologists. • Demonstrate practical skills in laboratory-based and other psychological research. • Describe and evaluate questionnaire and test construction, implementation, and interpretation. • Describe the key principles for designing, implementing, and evaluating programs of behavior change. • Locate, evaluate, and use information appropriately in the research process. • Undertake statistical analysis appropriately. • Use basic Web-search, word-processing, database, e-mail, spreadsheet, and data analysis programs. • Design and conduct basic studies to address psychological questions: frame research questions; undertake literature searches; critically analyze


151

theoretical and empirical studies; formulate testable hypotheses; operationalize variables; choose an appropriate methodology; make valid and reliable measurements; analyze data and interpret results; and write research reports. Research methodology and statistics (RM&S) should be strongly emphasized in UG education. RM&S knowledge is usually delivered in large-lecture format, but most “experiential” and “active” UG teaching and learning strategies involve students (a) learning statistical techniques, (b) demonstrating basic laboratory techniques or phenomena in such areas as perception and physiological psychology, and (c) undertaking research projects. These are all examples of “application” of RM&S knowledge. Apart from examination, written research reports have been the main communication outcome in UG education. First year may involve compulsory experience of research as a participant, and here the challenge is to link this “application” back to the knowledge, which can be achieved simply by requiring students to answer research-relevant questions on a (pass/fail) form at the end of each experience (J. Cranney, UNSW). The higher the year, the more likely it is that students will be given a research project assignment, although this does not preclude first-year students from also participating (see Example 2.1). It is advantageous for students to experience the full range of research approaches (e.g., laboratory research and survey research; quantitative and qualitative RM&S). In programs where applicable, the third- or fourth-year thesis is the ultimate UG application of RM&S knowledge. For the thesis, some programs have conferencestyle oral presentations of both the proposal and the final product, each of which attracts a proportion of the final thesis grade (S. Provost, Southern Cross University). This reflects effective formative assessment of SLOs. Some specific examples are given below. Example 2.1: First-Year Group Research Projects Students undertake group research projects in the last half of the semester. There is some choice as to topic, and some choice in specifics such as the independent or grouping variables. Their research proposal needs to be approved, and they must test at least one participant. The next challenge is making sense of their data, and the instructor usually interprets whether apparent effects are “significant.” Finally, students orally present their research in the tutorial, where it is assessed according to predetermined criteria. An alternative is to run an experiment in class, which students write up for their laboratory report. This report is followed by a group research proposal of a follow-up study, which they orally present in class (J. Cranney & S. Morris, UNSW). Example 2.2: Research Placements At some universities, students can take a research placement unit in which they work in a laboratory for a semester. Other models for UG hands-on research experience include the summer research scholarship, or voluntary research assistantship programs.

152


Variation 1: Year 3 students interview Year 4 students about their experience with their research thesis projects (sometimes observing the researcher in action), and report back to the class (B. Spehar, UNSW). Example 2.3: Critical Consumers of Applied Research In a “Common Sense Psych Myth-busting” exercise, students find a report about scientific research in the popular press. In class, they deconstruct the article, breaking the story down into its research components and analyzing its conclusions. They identify the research questions being posed, present them as a hypothesis or two, and come up with a design to test that hypothesis. That would involve identifying the variables under investigation, the type of sampling needed, and how they would treat the data. In some cases, the instructor may track down the actual published research that the article is based on. Students then compare what is in the newspaper article with what is in the original source (J. Reece, RMIT University; J. Milne-Home, University of Western Sydney). Example 2.4: Pre-Honors Group Research Projects Groups of Year 3 students research the literature in a particular area, find a gap in the literature, design an experiment to investigate this theoretical or empirical gap, present a proposal to the class (also a written one, which is marked), set up and run their group experiment, analyze it, and then write it up, individually, as a journal article. This experience provides an introduction in a group format to the actual research process, which they may undertake in Year 4 (F. Martin, U. Tasmania). A variation on this approach is to use as an assessment task where the student (with some guidance) chooses a research question and then (with appropriate scaffolding) writes a three-page grant proposal (including lay description, background, project aims, significance and outcomes, approach and methodology, timeline, and national benefits) (J. Cornish, Macquarie University). Example 2.5: Human Descriptive Statistics First-year students are introduced to statistics in tutorials by themselves becoming “numbers.” They then move around the room to demonstrate principles such as the normal curve, and variability. This is particularly good for students with little mathematics background (F. Martin, U. Tasmania). Variation 1: Each student conducts a single case study with a teenager, entering his or her data online. The lecturer feeds that data back to the whole class to illustrate various RM&S principles; for example, she may release an aspect of their averaged data, thus revealing particular patterns of adolescent behavior (a formula for getting students hooked on psychology; J. Milne-Home, University of Western Sydney).

3. Critical Thinking Skills in Psychology Respect and use critical and creative thinking, skeptical inquiry, and the scientific approach to solve problems related to behavior and mental processes.


153

Suggested Specific SLOs • Apply knowledge of the scientific method in thinking about problems related to behavior and mental processes. • Question claims that arise from myth, stereotype, pseudo-science, or untested assumptions. • Demonstrate an attitude of critical thinking that includes persistence, open-mindedness, and intellectual engagement. • Demonstrate a capacity for higher-order analysis, including the capacity to identify recurrent patterns in human behavior. • Evaluate the quality of information, including differentiating empirical evidence from speculation. • Identify and evaluate the source and context of behavior. • Recognize and defend against the major fallacies of human thinking. • Evaluate issues and behavior using different theoretical and methodological approaches. • Use reasoning and evidence to recognize, develop, defend, and criticize arguments and persuasive appeals. • Demonstrate creative and pragmatic problem solving. Critical thinking is a particularly important graduate attribute for our ubiquitous psychology major graduates (Dunn, Halonen, & Smith, 2008; Gray, 2008). It deserves more than just implicit emphasis, given that (a) most will not undertake any kind of research beyond the third or fourth year, let alone professional practice training, (b) this attribute overlaps to some extent with all other attributes, and (c) they can apply psychology critical-thinking skills to a range of contexts in their personal and professional life. Example 3.1: Cognitive Fallacies Lectures on cognitive fallacies (from the key “causation vs. correlation” fallacy to the range of formal fallacies) can be accompanied by students finding examples in the media of such fallacies, and bringing them to class for discussion. This material could help create a class resource, from which examples may be taken in a final examination (J. Cranney, UNSW). Variation 1: Psychological myths (e.g., we use only 10% of our brains; see Lilienfeld, Lynn, Ruscio, & Beyerstein, 2010) provide another example for use in this manner; specifically, students undertake research to determine whether there is any support for these popular notions. Variation 2: Students can be asked to search the Web for sites on celebrity birthdays to find their (or a parent’s) “horoscopic twin”—that is, someone born on the same date in the same year—and then compare their personalities, to critically assess horoscope assumptions (J. Homewood, Macquarie University). Example 3.2: Creative Thinking in Research In a lecture setting, you can develop creative research thinking by asking students in small groups to design a study to answer a question that is usually of social

154


relevance (e.g., possible psychological consequences for children in detention centers). Ask them to form a hypothesis (independent of literature search; they need to choose an effect direction) to determine independent and dependent variables and to operationalize them, to briefly describe the procedure, and to consider ethical and resource issues. Randomly select groups to describe their ideas, then discuss methodological soundness, feasibility, and so forth. Contrast experimental and quasi-experimental approaches. They receive two practices across two lectures, and complete a similar exercise in the final examination. These exercises give students practice with designing experiments, especially operationalizing variables, and also in considering the reality of resources and ethics in research (J. Cranney, UNSW). Example 3.3: Critical Thinking in Research Meltzoff (1998) provides an overview of research methods, followed by a number of “bogus” research articles, each of which have various methodological flaws that are later outlined in detail. First-year students receive two examples to read before the lecture, where in groups they attempt to find as many flaws as possible. Groups are randomly selected to offer one criticism, and a list of flaws is then created. Finally, students are given the textbook “answer,” but are told that the list is not exhaustive. The source is not revealed to the students. The students are given one new bogus article to critique in the final examination (J. Cranney, UNSW). Variation 1: Third-year students write a critical analysis of a real journal article in which they answer specific questions such as: What are the objectives of the study? What was the design of the study? What are the most significant conÂ� clusions drawn from the study? Do you think this study was soundly based on the theory? Explain. Do you think the discussion section discussed the results accurately? Explain. Were there issues that could not be adequately addressed? How could you improve on the current study? (F. Martin, U. Tasmania).

4. Values in Psychology Value empirical evidence; tolerate ambiguity during the search for greater understanding of behavior and knowledge structures; act ethically and professionally; understand the complexity of sociocultural and international diversity, and reflect other values that are the underpinnings of psychology as a discipline. Suggested Specific SLOs • Recognize and respect social, cultural, linguistic, spiritual, and gender diversity. • Explain how the science and practice of psychology is influenced by social, historical, professional, and cultural contexts. • Identify and describe the sociocultural and international contexts that influence individual differences in beliefs, values, and behavior.


155

• Use information in an ethical manner (e.g., acknowledge and respect the work and intellectual property rights of others through appropriate citations in oral and written communication). • Recognize how privilege, power, and oppression may affect prejudice, discrimination, and inequity. • Explain how prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behaviors might exist in oneself and in others. • Recognize the limitations of one’s psychological knowledge and skills, and value life-long learning. • Display high standards of personal and professional integrity in relationships with others. • Exhibit a scientific attitude in critically thinking about, and learning about, human behavior, and in creative and pragmatic problem solving. • Evaluate psychologists’ behavior in psychological research and other professional contexts in relation to the national codes of conduct. • Promote evidence-based approaches to understanding and changing human behavior. Some of these SLOs appear to be quite diverse and complex, but the underlying value is this: if one has an informed understanding of why people behave the way they do in particular contexts, then one should use that knowledge in a constructive way. One could view most ethical codes as reflecting agreed-upon principles of behavior that help people to become engaged with both local and global issues, and to be able to live together in a community, balancing individual and communal needs, short- and long-term goals. Example 4.1: Cultural Diversity To appreciate cultural differences in behavior (first learning outcome), first-year students are given a non-obtrusive observational study assignment regarding some type of human social behavior (e.g., going to the international airport and looking at differences in behavior on greeting/departing). They then summarize the information according to psychological principles, and present the information in tutorials. The instructor needs to ensure that all ethical issues have been covered prior to undertaking this exercise (L. Zinkiewicz, Deakin University). Variation 1: Films can also be used effectively toward this end. Meiners (2009) provides an extensive list of feature-length films produced in countries around the world that can effectively be used to observe and discuss human social behavior in various cultural settings. Many instructors successfully incorporate films into their classes to provide focused observations of psychological phenomena, and many lists and guidelines exist (S. McCarthy, Northern Arizona UniversityYuma; see Atkinson, 2006; Green, 2003; Nelson, 2008; Wedding et al, 2005; see also Denson & Ing, Chapter 8 in this volume).

156


Example 4.2: Ethical Dilemmas Some national psychology societies provide a set of case studies demonstrating a number of different ethical dilemmas. These can be given to small groups to discuss in tutorials, with each identifying what part of the ethical code is relevant, what the consequences might be, and how to avoid the situation or behave ethically and adequately in the context (see Davidson & Morrissey, Chapter 4 in this volume). Example 4.3: Intergroup Imagined Contact In a tutorial, actively involve UG students to reduce their outgroup bias and increase their intergroup harmony by having second- and third-year students imagine positive or “cooperative contact” with a cultural minority outgroup. This imagined contact situation should last for a few minutes. Measure pre-test and post-test attitudes towards this outgroup to see whether the students’ cultural awareness and respect have improved after the imagined contact. Finally, use these results as a basis for a class discussion on how students can effectively implement this strategy outside the classroom (see White, Chapter 5 in this volume). Example 4.4: The Ethics of Animal Research Students are led through a brief structured debate as part of the core physiologiÂ� cal psychology tutorial material. They are asked to prepare with set readings covering a number of perspectives. In the tutorial, form groups of three: one in the judge/timekeeper/chairperson role, one in the “for” role, and one in the “against” role. The question could be, “Should we be able to use rats in research to model human behavioral disorders?” The debaters receive 5 minutes to prepare their arguments and 3 minutes to present, and the judge tallies up the valid points made. Each receives a further 2 minutes to prepare and 2 minutes for rebuttal. Again, the judge keeps tally. Finally, the judge determines who has won. The tutor then ascertains how many “for” and “against” outcomes there are, and reiterates some of the main arguments on each side. The tutor should then inform students of the ethical codes, procedures, and laws regarding animal research relevant to either that department/school or a typical department that undertakes such research (J. Cranney, UNSW).

5. Communication Skills in Psychology Communicate effectively in a variety of formats and in a variety of contexts. Suggested Specific SLOs • Write a standard research report using American Psychological Association (APA) structure and formatting conventions. • Write effectively in a variety of other formats (e.g., essays, research proposals, reports) and for a variety of purposes (e.g., informing, arguing).


157

• Demonstrate effective oral communication skills in various formats (e.g., debate, group discussion, presentation) and for various purposes. • Demonstrate basic interviewing skills. • Demonstrate effective interpersonal communication skills, including the abilities to: listen accurately and actively; use psychological concepts and theories to understand interactions with others; identify the impact or potential impact of one’s behavior on others; provide constructive feedback to others; and adopt flexible techniques to communicate sensitively and effectively with diverse ethnic and cultural partners, including in the context of teamwork. • Collaborate effectively, demonstrating an ability to work with groups to complete projects within reasonable timeframes, and manage conflicts appropriately and ethically. The primary communication tool in UG education in many countries is the research report. Some survey and anecdotal data suggest that even for ubiquitous psychology major graduates, this style of writing (no doubt reflecting other skills such as information literacy and critical thinking) translates well into diverse workplaces (Cranney et al., 2008). Structured developmental activities and formative assessment could help students apply written communication knowledge before the final submission of a full report (see Example 5.1). Moreover, we have rarely ventured beyond the research report and essay in terms of forms of written communication (e.g., writing of “briefs,” a key task for many graduates in the workplace; preparing posters). Also, we have lacked creativity in teaching oral communication, despite the value of these skills in diverse work settings. This omission may simply perpetuate the nature of our own training—that is, we ourselves may not have experienced structured learning and assessment opportunities. If we lack the capabilities needed to help students develop these communication skills, then we must call upon our colleagues in the university student learning centers to assist us. Subcomponents of these relatively standard forms of communication include the appropriate creation of figures, tables, diagrams, and flowcharts. We should also be considering communication forms relevant to our students’ new technological world, such as the use of Facebook and Second Life. Regardless of the mode of communication, however, the effective use of these forms of communication requires critical and analytical thinking as students condense information into logical structures and sequences. Example 5.1: Formative Development of Research Report Writing Skills We all teach report writing differently; and there are many handbooks and websites (e.g., http://writingworkshop.edtec.unsw.edu.au/psyc_report/overview. htm) to draw on. One way to use “formative” strategies in the first year is to take students through a number of structured exercises and to make the first assessable task a group write-up of the Introduction and Method sections of a class experiment (see also Beins, Smith, & Dunn, 2010). Then each student writes the whole

158


report by herself or himself, drawing on the feedback he or she received for the group effort. Similar but less intense strategies can be employed in larger first-year courses, where structured group literature search exercises lead up to the individual writing of the Introduction and Method sections in the first semester (J. Cranney, S. Morris, G. Huon, & B. Spehar, UNSW; see also Martin & Adam, 2008). For beginning students, connecting to more familiar topics as a bridge to research writing can be useful. There are a variety of ways to do this. Gokhan (2009) offers an excellent, detailed writing unit using art (see McCarthy et al., 2009, pp. 464–480). Example 5.2: Summarizing Psychology Research in Lay Terms Students are required to write a letter in response to a request from a teacher/ company director/other non-psychologist, outlining the psychological princiÂ�ples involved in a particular area and the evidence for and against. For example, parents approach you and ask whether they should be allowing their child to continue to speak their language of origin in the home, as they suspect that doing this will compromise the child’s ability to become fluent in English (F. Martin, U. Tasmania).

6. Learning and the Application of Psychology Understand and apply psychological principles to personal, social, and organizational issues. Suggested Specific SLOs • Describe major areas of applied psychology (e.g., clinical, counseling, organizational, forensic, health). • Apply knowledge of legislative frameworks (including privacy, human rights). • Apply knowledge of consumer and carer participation in psychological care. • Apply knowledge of psychology, society, and the workplace/influencing systems. • Apply psychological concepts, theories, and research findings to solve problems in everyday life and in society. • Reflect on one’s experiences and learn from them in order to identify and articulate one’s personal, sociocultural, and professional values; demonstrate insightful awareness of one’s feelings, motives, and attitudes based on psychological principles. • Apply psychological principles to promote personal development through self-regulation in setting and achieving career and personal goals; self-assess performance accurately; incorporate feedback for improved performance; and purposefully evaluate the quality of one’s thinking (metacognition).


159

• Demonstrate a capacity for independent learning to sustain personal and professional development in the changing world of the science and practice of psychology. This might appear to be the most relevant “applied” graduate attribute, but that depends on how you define “applied.” The examples given below may help academics less familiar with this attribute. Example 6.1: Applying Psychological Principles to Self-Understanding Completing first-year psychology should give students increased understanding of themselves, including aspects of personality and capability (Gray, 2008). One early strategy would be to complete the “VIA Signature Strengths Questionnaire” on Seligman’s “Authentic Happiness” website, http://www.authentichappiness. sas.upenn.edu/Default.aspx (see also McGovern, Chapter 21 in this volume). Then, following ethical guidance regarding students’ choice of the extent of selfdisclosure, students engage in a class discussion about personality and individual differences. The questionnaire results also could become part of a personal learning portfolio (see Example 6.3). A class discussion of the reliability and validity of such questionnaires, compared to those found in popular magazines, could also be informative (J. Cranney & S. Morris, UNSW). Variation 1: A further exercise could be writing a newspaper article where each student interviews herself or himself with some focused common questions relevant to psychological concepts (L. Zinkiewicz, Deakin University). Variation 2: Some schools have a careers counseling service; if viable, first-year psychology students could be encouraged to attend the service and reflect on the results, in particular any increased understanding of themselves and their potential career paths, in their (assessable) journal (J. Earl, UNSW). Example 6.2: Career Development from First Year First-year students are given a career development exercise that has three stages. First, they submit an “expression of interest” (similar to a cover letter) and a curriculum vitae (CV) for a bogus professional psychology internship position (different settings across different years). Second, they receive lectures and particiÂ�pate in tutorial activities about how to write CVs and cover letters, and other optimal career development strategies. Finally, they again submit their expression of interest and CV, which are then fully assessed (E. Chan, M. Kofod, J. Cranney, UNSW). Some universities have introduced a capstone unit in the final year of undergraduate study with the explicit aim of putting theory into practice with an emphasis on career development (J. Homewood, Macquarie University). Example 6.3: Psychological Literacy Portfolios and Reflective Journals Portfolios and reflective journals do not have to be work-intensive for assessors. For the psychological literacy example, although students may need to address all

160


the graduate attributes that make up psychological literacy and/or make fortnightly journal entries, they can be required to (a) indicate one particular entry that they think displays high-quality reflection, and (b) write a 250-word summary of what they learned during the unit. In addition, the marker randomly chooses one other entry to mark in addition to these two. To prevent last-minute journal creation, students may be required to submit entries electronically. Although many universities now have electronic portfolios, for psychology students this is not essential. See Cranney and colleagues (2005) for one description of this application. Example 6.4: Work-Integrated Learning Some universities have a stand-alone placement unit during Year 3 where students find a setting that interests them (e.g., a school, a counseling service), are responsible for organizing all legal and ethical preconditions (e.g., criminal checks), and contract with the supervisor and unit coordinator to develop certain capacities during work in that setting. Assessment is based on a reflective essay and the supervisor’s evaluation. Because placements for clinical masters students are in short supply, students may choose placements in any workplace where there is significant interaction with other workers and/or clients. They analyze the work situation from applied social psychology perspectives and use their psychology knowledge and skills to construct a proposal that will assist the organization in some way. For example, higher-level students could undertake a needs analysis and design a program; others could implement the program; then another set could evaluate it (L. Zinkiewicz, Deakin University). Finally, McGovern and associates (2010) give the “Dr. Cantrell” example of a class project that involves students solving problems in an elementary school setting.

Conclusions In theory, implementing these kinds of “applied” psychology L&T strategies should develop greater psychological literacy. At the very least, students should better understand their own strengths and weaknesses, and be more effective in their personal and professional lives—and potentially be more effective citizenambassadors for psychology. Finally, although the ideas in this paper should seem reasonable to most stakeholders, there remains a huge gap in our knowledge about the effectiveness of different L&T strategies. In “valuing empirical evidence,” we should be reviewing our current educational practices periodically in light of the evidence base (for reviews see Halpern & Hakel, 2003; Pashler et al., 2007; Trapp, 2010; Worrell et al., 2010; Zinkiewicz et al., 2003). Although there are many psychological principles from cognition, social, and motivational psychology that should be applied to tertiary educational settings (across all programs), psychology academics have been reticent in taking on this kind of applied research. It is time we moved beyond this maladaptive practice, for the direct benefit of our students, and for


161

the indirect benefit of the discipline and profession of psychology, and for society generally.

Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the contribution of members of the Australian Psychology Educators Network (APEN), particularly at the APEN Satellite event held at the 2008 APS National Conference in Hobart, supported by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council. We also thank the Australian Psychological Society for stimulating this discussion paper, particularly the National Psychology Education and Training Reference Group. We thank also Shirley Zhang, Kandice Varcin, Jun Mo Jeong, and Fiona McDonald for assistance in researching the background materials for this paper. Finally, an earlier version of this paper was published in Cranney and associates (2008). For further information on any of the “authored” strategies mentioned above, please contact the author directly (who may well have other strategies he or she is willing to share). Finally, it is acknowledged, as in the original publication (Cranney et al., 2008), that some of the Australian SLOs are directly taken from the APA Guidelines (APA, 2007).

References American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, D. C.: Author. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ ed/precollege/about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf. Atkinson, R. (2006). Psychflix. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from http://www.psychflix.com/ welcome.html. Badcock, D., Hammond, G., Gillam, B., Brewer, N., & Andrews, S. (2007). Psychology: the science of mind, brain, and behaviour (Occasional Paper Series No. 6). Canberra: Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from http://www.fasts.org/images/occasional-papers/fasts%20psych%20paper. pdf. Baker, D. B., & Benjamin, L. T., Jr. (2000). The affirmation of the scientist-practitioner: a look back at Boulder. American Psychologist, 55, 241–247. Beins, B. C., Smith, R. A., & Dunn, D. S. (2010). Writing as a developmental process. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill, IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 253–278). New York: Oxford University Press. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Cranney, J., Kofod, M., Huon, G., Jensen, L., Levin, K., McAlpine, I., Scoufis, M., & Whitaker, N. (2005). Portfolio tools: learning and teaching strategies to facilitate development of graduate attributes. Proceedings of the Blended Learning in Science Teaching and Learning Symposium, September 30, 2005, University of Sydney. Sydney: UniServe Science.

162


Cranney, J., Provost, S., Katsikitis, M., Martin, F., White, F. A., & Cohen, L. (2008). Designing a diverse, future-oriented vision for undergraduate psychology in Australia: final investigation report. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Retrieved from http://www.altc.edu.au/carrick/webdav/site/carricksite/users/siteadmin/public/grants_project_psychology_report_aug08.pdf. Cranney, J., Turnbull, C., Provost, S. C., Martin, F., Katsikitis, M., White, F. A., Voudouris, N. J., Montgomery, I. M., Heaven, P. C. L., Morris, S., & Varcin, K. J. (2009). Graduate attributes of the four-year Australian undergraduate psychology program. Australian Psychologist, 44, 253–262. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Dunn, D. S., Halonen, J. S., & Smith, R. A. (Eds.) (2008). Teaching critical thinking in psychology: a handbook of best practices. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Dunn, D. S., McCarthy, M., Baker, S., Halonen, J. S., & Hill, G. W., IV. (2007). Quality benchmarks in undergraduate psychology programs. American Psychologist, 62, 650–670. Gokhan, M. (2009). Using art to connect to psychology: a staged research project. In S. McCarthy, V. Karandashev, M. Stevens, A. Thatcher, J. Jaafar, K. Moore, A. Trapp, & C. L. Brewer (Eds.), Teaching psychology around the world (pp. 464–480). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Gray, P. (2008). The value of Psychology 101 in liberal arts education: A psychocentric theory of the university. Observer, 21(9), 29–32. Green, R. (2003). Teaching psychology through film and video. APS Observer, 16(7), 23–25. Hall, J., & Altmaier, E. M. (Ed.). (2008). Global promise. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Halpern, D. F. (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Halpern, D. F., & Hakel, M. D. (2003). Applying the science of learning to the university and beyond: teaching for long-term retention and transfer. Change, 35(4), 36–41. Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. L. (2010). 50 great myths of popular psychology: shattering widespread misconceptions about human behavior. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Lipp, O., Terry, D., Chalmers, D., Bath, D., Hannan, G., Martin, F., Farrell, G., Wilson, P., & Provost, S. (2007). Learning outcomes and curriculum development in psychology. Sydney: Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Retrieved May 1, 2008, from http://www.altc.edu.au/resource-learning-outcomespsychology-uq-2006. Lunt, I., Bartram, D., Döpping, J. G., Jern, S., Job, R., Lecuyer, R., Newstead, S., Nieminen, P., Odland, S., Peiró, J. M., Poortinga, Y., Roe, R., Wilpert, B., & Herman, E. (2001). EuroPsyT–a framework for education and training for psychologists in Europe. Report by Project EuroPsyT, funded by the Leonardo da Vinci programme. Retrieved Feb. 22, 2007, from http://www.europsych.org.


163

Marsella, A. J. (2007). Education and training for a global psychology: foundations, issues, and actions. In M. J. Stevens & U. P. Gielen (Eds.), Toward a global psychology: research, intervention, and pedagogy (pp. 333–361). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Martin, F., & Adam, A. (2008). Engagement with the learning process in first-year psychology classes. In N. Voudouris & V. Mrowinski (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2008 43rd Australian Psychological Society Annual Conference (pp. 204–208). Melbourne: Australian Psychological Society. McCarthy, S. (2002). Preventing future terrorist activities among adolescents through global psychology: a cooperative learning community. In C. Stout (Ed.), Psychology of terrorism (Vol. 4, pp. 456–463). New York: Greenwood-Praeger. McCarthy, S., Karandashev, V., Stevens, M., Thatcher, A., Jaafar, J., Moore, K., Trapp, A. & Brewer, C. (2009) (Eds.). Teaching psychology around the world. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E., Jr., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Society. Meiners, M. (2009). Viewing films to build global competence: a case study. In S. McCarthy, V. Karandashev, M. Stevens, A. Thatcher, J. Jaafar, K. Moore, A. Trapp, & C. Brewer (Eds.), Teaching psychology around the world. (pp. 456–463). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Meltzoff, J. (1998). Critical thinking about research: psychology and related fields. Washington D. C.: American Psychological Association. Nelson, E. (2008). Using films to teach psychology: a resource of film study guides. Retrieved June 29, 2009, from http://teachpsych.org/otrp/resources/nelson06.pdf. Pashler, H., Bain, P., Bottge, B., Graesser, A., Koedinger, K., McDaniel, M., et al. (2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning. Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http://ncer. ed.gov. Provost, S. C., Martin, F., Hannan, G., Farrell, G., Lipp, O. V., Terry, D. J., et al. (2010). Where should the balance be between “scientist” and “practitioner” in Australian undergraduate psychology? Australian Psychologist, 45, 243–248. Quality Assurance Agency (2002). Subject benchmark statement: Psychology. Retrieved Dec. 18, 2007, from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/benchmark/ statements/Psychology07.asp. Trapp, A. (2010). Teaching you to suck eggs? Using psychology to teach psychology. In D. Upton & A. Trapp, Teaching psychology in higher education (pp. 82–104). Chichester: BPS Blackwell. Upton, D., & Trapp, A. L. (2010). Teaching psychology in higher education. Chichester: BPS Blackwell. Watson, D., & Tharp, R. (2009). Self-directed behavior: self-modifications for personal adjustment. Pacific Grove, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. Wedding, D., Boyd, M., & Niemiec, R. (2005). Movies and mental illness: using films to understand psychopathology. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishing.

164


Worrell, F. C., Casad, B. J., Daniel, D. B., McDaniel, M., Messer, W. S., Miller, H. L., Jr., et al. (2010). Promising principles for translating psychological science into teaching and learning. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 129–144). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Zinkiewicz, L., Hammond, N., & Trapp. A. (2003). Applying psychology disciplinary knowledge to psychology teaching and learning (Report and Evaluation Series No. 2). York, UK: LTSN Psychology. Retrieved July 25, 2008, from http://www.psychology. heacademy.ac.uk/docs/pdf/p20030321_r2p.pdf.

PART THREE

Global Perspectives


12 Psychological Literacy An Italian Perspective R e m o J o b , L o r e ll a L o t t o , and Claudio Tonzar

I

n this chapter, we will discuss some issues related to the design of undergraduate curricula in psychology. Specifically, we will argue that bachelor programs in psychology would benefit from (a) adopting a Â�competence-based approach; (b) favoring active learning; (c) creating occasions for experiencing real-world situations; and (d) stimulating mobility and cultural sensitivity. We see these activities as consistent with, and instrumental to, the process of becoming psychologically literate citizens as they are oriented to value scientific reasoning and to stimulate creative, psychologically based, and context-sensitive approaches to situations. After a brief introduction, we will present some issues related to the notion of the psychologically literate citizen. We will then outline our view on the design of bachelor programs in psychology, and end with some final considerations.

Introduction Psychology is a very popular subject in many countries, Italy included, as evidenced by the large numbers of students enrolling in bachelor programs in psychology. At present, there are 35 universities providing bachelor courses in psychology, and the yearly number of graduates is about 7,400 (Job, Tonzar, & Lotto, 2009). In contrast to what happens in other countries, most of these graduates enroll in a masters program in psychology, as in Italy there is no numerus clausus for the master programs in psychology. As a consequence, Italy has one of the highest numbers of professional psychologists per capita in Europe (1:775 in 2010). This may have consequences for psychological literacy: on the one hand, knowledge and skills of psychology are quite widespread; on the other, this may be mainly restricted to people working professionally as psychologists, as the number of people with a bachelor in psychology holding a masters degree in a different discipline is quite limited.

168

T h e P s y c h o l o g i c ally L ite r ate Citi z e n

However, psychology is also taught in programs leading to degrees other than psychology, such as courses in teacher training and education, health degrees, social studies, and management and business. In these programs psychology is either taught at a general level, presenting students with introductory courses to familiarize them with basic knowledge about the discipline, or at a specialist level to allow understanding of the specificity of an area (e.g., economic psychology in business programs, school psychology in teacher training programs). Thus, similar to what happens in other countries, a large number of Italian students are exposed to, and acquire basic knowledge of, concepts, theories, and empirical evidence about psychology as an integral or complementary part of their cultural and academic training. As part of the knowledge about the working of the mind and the complexities of human behavior, students exposed to psychology should value the following: the use of scientific and rational thinking, being aware of the biases and cognitive traps implicated in reasoning and decision making (see, e.g., Tversky & Kahneman, 1974); the role of emotions in establishing and maintaining relationships among people at the personal, social, and organizational level (see, e.g., Forgas & Fitness, 2008); and the effects of acting ethically and metacognitively with oneself and others (see, e.g., Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2005). They should also value the fundamental needs of humans for physical and psychological security, being aware of the necessity of promoting well-being, autonomy, and respect for diversity (see, e.g., Trimble, 2003). Recently, McGovern and colleagues (2010) have proposed the notion of “psychologically literate citizens” to capture this state of affairs—that is, “educating sophisticated, psychologically literate citizens—future leaders—committed to acting in socially responsible ways in local, national, and global contexts” (p. 19). This notion is quite interesting and may be very fruitful for its social implications, not only for the drive to design learning programs that place emphasis on students’ learning outcomes linked to the public’s demand for accountability, but also for enhancing the social value of psychology in the public eye. Before discussing some aspects of the curriculum on the basis of the Italian situation, we would like to briefly touch on two important issues: the fact that psychological literacy is best conceived as a process, and the perceived possible consequences of psychological literacy for the psychological literate person. We like to think of the notion of the psychologically literate citizen as referring to a process rather than to an output. In other words, acquiring a set of competencies and skills, and being able to apply them in a given context, may in itself enable the acquisition of further competencies and skills, and this in turn may widen the range of possible application of such skills (see Cranney & Morris, Chapter 18 in this volume). Being a process, the development of competencies and skills happens over time and in different experiential contexts, and the process can be facilitated or hampered by several factors, some of which are related to how the process unfolds. The relationship between goals and means is one of these factors. When congruency exists between the aim of the study curriculum, its expected outcomes, and the didactic action(s) the student is involved in, then the process is

Psychological Literacy

169

facilitated, while the presence of incongruencies between teaching methods and expected outcomes may hamper the process. Our second issue is that being psychologically literate in the sense proposed by McGovern and associates (2010) has not only relevant and positive social and relational implications, but also beneficial effects for individuals. Having competences and skills that allow one to fulfill a role in finding appropriate solutions to problems is likely to create positive emotions and to increase the individual’s sense of selfefficacy (Bandura, 1991)—that is, one’s beliefs about one’s capabilities to exercise influence over events that affect one’s own and other people’s lives. It may also foster the sense of being an agent of change rather than a passive spectator. With this perspective, the feeling of balance stemming from having an active role in decision making may contribute significantly to the image of the self and may enhance the disposition to act forwardly and actively. Of course, being psychological literate implies being an insightful and reflective person in order to be both realistic and judicious about possessing the right competencies and about the possibility of being an agent of change.

Curriculum Design In this section, we would like to discuss four aspects related to the process leading to the acquisition, and successive translation into practice, of psychological literacy (cf. Chapter 2 in this volume).

Competence-Based Approaches In Italy, both the bachelor and the masters programs are organized according to the input approach—that is, the design of curricula are based on the desired content matter formulated by the academic staff. However, there is now growing agreement that an output approach should be considered in designing education and training programs in psychology—that is, a detailed specification of competencies related to what psychologists should be expected to be able to do following training. The shift is particularly important for masters programs, as this level, together with supervised practice, is directly linked to entry into the profession. However, a consideration of competencies could be productive for bachelor-level students as well, where a mixed input–output approach may be the most suitable and fruitful. Such a mixed approach has been adopted by the EuroPsy group for designing a reference model for psychologists’ education and training (Lunt et al., 2001). Lunt and coworkers (in press) have recently proposed that input-based and output-based models fulfill partially different functions, and might be instrumental for reaching partially different goals. Thus, approaches that focus on defining inputs are valuable because they provide a framework for acquiring a body of facts, principles, and theories related to a field of study, and for developing a critical

170


understanding of such a field. These approaches are useful for assessing the equivalence of provision at the organizational and institutional levels. On the other hand, approaches that focus on assessment of outcomes (competence) are valuable because they provide contexts to develop the abilities to use knowledge, methodologies, and skills in specific situations, with varying degrees of responsibility and autonomy. These approaches are useful for assessing the equivalence of competence at the individual level. According to Roe (2002), competence is “a learned ability to adequately perform a task, duty or role” (p. 195). In this view, competencies integrate knowledge, skills, and personal values and attitudes; they are acquired through work experience and learning by doing. Competencies represent a dynamic combination of knowledge, understanding, skills, and abilities that students build on and develop during their studies. EuroPsy has proposed that for chartered psychologists the standard period for acquiring the competences for entering the profession is 5 years of education plus 1 year of supervised practice. Thus, in programs comprising a bachelor and a master program, the bachelor program per se does not provide any occupational qualification as a chartered psychologist, and it could be misleading to define psychological competencies for the bachelor program. Indeed, from the point of view of psychological literacy, acquiring professional competences may be unnecessary. However, there are several cogent reasons that render competence acquisition at the bachelor level useful and productive. First, knowledge is an essential part of competences, and acquiring it in connection with the development of correlated skills and attitudes will render the acquisition process more meaningful and fine-tuned. Second, competencies are learned over time, so it is wise both to allow enough time for competences to be acquired, and to talk about varying degrees of competences: it is likely that at the bachelor level competencies are acquired to a lesser degree than at the masters level. Third, the bachelor level offers a valuable input to work in a wide variety of settings in the public and private sector and will provide individuals with welldeveloped and transferable core skills in the areas of communication, numeracy, problem solving, analysis, and technology, all core aspects of psychological literacy. In Italy, it also enables graduates to hold a position that involves working directly with people, including coaching and mentoring. These abilities are among those that contribute to a psychologically literate citizen. Finally, at the bachelor level two aspects of competence particularly relevant for psychological literacy can be the focus of training and attentive consideration: attitudes and basic competences. Attitudes refer to the way in which we place ourselves when interacting with other people, and thus they relate to accuracy, integrity, self-criticism, commitment, responsibility, respect and tolerance for others, ethical awareness and conduct, and service orientation (see Roe, 2002). Basic competences, such as problem solving, teamwork, critical thinking, and other enabling competencies, are instrumental in facing, rationally and efficiently, issues arising at the individual, societal, and organizational levels. Thus, to enhance the effectiveness of psychological literacy, focusing on attitudes and


171

basic competences should be part of the bachelor curriculum, and for their acquisition proper methodologies, for example, problem-based learning, experiential learning, simulations, and role-plays, should be put into place.

Active Learning Approaches to teaching and learning should be devised that rely on active learning, by having learners learn by doing (acting in their environment to use elements of their knowledge) and think about their own learning (thus developing metacognitive skills). Lectures are the main means of teaching in most Italian universities, and their role should not be dismissed, as they are a direct and efficient way of transferring knowledge. However, lectures should be supplemented by other types of didactic activities to reach a variety of goals synergic with becoming a psychologically literate citizen: learning about practical research; applying knowledge to specific situations (see Cranney et al., Chapter 11 in this volume); reaching a deeper understanding; and consolidating students’ learning. In recent times, several Italian universities have used a range of such teaching activities— laboratory activities, workshops, tutorials, problem-based and work-based practice, internship learning, fieldwork, and role-playing—and the results seem promising (Job, Tonzar, & Lotto, 2010). To illustrate how active participation of students may help to frame a course outcome within a wider context, let us consider the following case report. For the past few years, a social cooperative operating in Rovereto, Italy, has organized boat excursions on the Garda Lake, in Northern Italy, for persons with disabilities, with the aim of providing them with occasions to interact with nature and to have the new experience of sailing, and as a way of interacting among people outside their usual environment. In addition to three persons with disabilities, the team usually consists of a skipper, an assistant to the skipper, and an educator. Michele, a student of psychology at the Faculty of Cognitive Science of the University of Trento, Rovereto Branch, participated as a volunteer in the role of assistant to the skipper in the summer of 2009. Michele was taking a course in qualitative data analysis taught by Prof. Massimiliano Tarozzi, who requires students to collect detailed protocols of some activities in the role of participant observer. Michele thought that the excursions were an ideal context for him and other students to collect data on the dynamic interaction among people, as required by the course. After discussing and coming to an agreement with the professor and the students, Michele and his fellow students organized a series of excursions that have the form of “fieldwork.” The project continues, and in addition to collecting qualitative data protocols, the students enjoy some interesting “side effects”: a role in helping setting up the excursion, which sometimes involves hoisting wheelchairs and other equipment; the possibility to become familiar with, and sensitive to, different kinds of disabilities; acquiring new expertise by learning some practical aspects of sailing; and last but not least, having fun sailing in a beautiful landscape while making some new friends.

172


Experiencing Real-World Situations Activities that allows for fruitful interchanges between the learning environment and society at large in order to apply students’ competencies and skills to realworld situations are beneficial. Italian faculties of psychology are often quite separated from the labor market and business activities, charity and volunteer work, and the productive sector. Even when an internship, or a stage intended as an introductory field training, is required by the curriculum, most of the time students pursue research in a university lab or center and do not perform activities in professional and work settings in the contexts mentioned above. There are many students who individually take part in such activities either on a voluntary basis or because they are part-time students holding an occupation at the same time; however, this is done without supervision and involvement of the university, and thus it is sometimes seen as an obstacle to the students’ learning process rather than an asset. Psychology students should be involved in real-world settings in which problem solving and critical decisions are to be made, but also in situations where human relations are the critical factor. We offer two examples. First, analyzing, understanding, and evaluating solutions about the dynamic of changes in the interaction among clerks, and between clerks and clients brought about by changes in the work organization of a bank, would be valuable to students learning about work and organizational psychology. Secondly, analyzing, understanding, and considering interventions about the impact of the school setting on a newly arrived migrant child would be formative for students enrolled in social psychology or school psychology courses. From this perspective, psychological literacy should be particularly relevant in the “third sector.” This expression is used to define the activity of those individuals operating in an intermediate position between the first sector (public organization) and the second sector (the market) that produces private goods. The value of third sector products cannot be easily estimated in terms of money, because the third sector involves not only goods and services but also relationships among individuals. To produce goods and services, third sector organizations, such as nongovernmental (NGO) associations devoted to sustainable development, need the work of individuals. Very often these people are volunteers, offering their help and contribution without being paid, inspired by personal choices, by love for people, for the environments where the work is done, or for their own communities. In other cases, the management of these organizations requires professional skills on a continuous basis, which can be provided only by paid work. A number of Italian people with a bachelor’s degree use their personal as well as their psychological competencies in projects related to mental health, education, and intercultural integration, among other possibilities. The fact that some of these activities are started during the bachelor program, and may be recognized in terms of learning credits from a university, would be very positive in order to develop a sense that these activities are an integral part of the curriculum when associated with adequate supervision. However, this needs not always be the case,


173

and psychological literacy may develop as part of one’s own personal development and familiarity with a specific subject. To illustrate this concept, consider the following experience. Clio is a young woman with a great passion for horses. When she was 12, she asked her parents if she could take riding lessons, and 2 years ago she realized her dream to buy a magnificent white horse. Every day she takes care of her horse at the riding school because, despite their size, they are very delicate animals. At the moment, she has just obtained her bachelor’s degree in psychology and she is considering whether to enroll in a masters program. A few months ago, a manager who works in an organization of the third sector informed her of an interesting plan to build a new riding school with a rehabilitation service for people with disabilities. This service is aimed at facilitating the development of autonomy in young people with disabilities through a relationship with horses, using specific techniques. The manager asked Clio if she was interested in the project and proposed that she take on the responsibility to perform several tasks: to familiarize the young people with the context, to facilitate the relationship between them and their designated horses, and to manage the contacts with the patients’ families. She accepted, and in this activity, she uses both her personal competencies about managing horses and the psychological knowledge she learned during her studies. The activities performed by Clio make the techniques involved in horse therapy more effective.

From Mobility to Cultural Sensitivity Some programs require students to experience complexity and a multiplicity of perspectives, be it cultural, academic, or disciplinary, among others. As traveling has often been a source of discovery, both about the world and about oneself, one way to reach this goal is to promote mobility of students, either through formal programs or through personal choice and preference. This would promote psychological literacy, as experiencing diversity may act both as a facilitator for the development of psychological literacy and as an asset in applying psychological literacy to different situations. From the institutional point of view, there still are several barriers to students spending study visits in a guest university as part of their curriculum. To a lesser degree, difficulties still exist for students to undertake the entire different cycles (bachelor, master, and PhD) in different countries or within Italy, in a different university. Fortunately, there are signs that the situation may be changing for the better. On the one hand, some Italian universities are moving toward the development of double and joint degrees awarded to students who spend study periods in two or more universities as part of an integrated curriculum. On the other hand, the Bologna process has helped greatly, and still does, in harmonizing the structure of degrees within and across European countries, and the introduction of credit rating and the European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) may support greater mobility within degree programs, enabling Italian students

174


to make greater use of the opportunities provided by the European Higher Education Area. Finally, a relevant role from this perspective is offered by initiatives such as the Tuning Project (Gonzalez & Wagenaar, 2008), an EU-funded project aimed at redesigning, developing, implementing, evaluating, and enhancing higher education. This provides an invaluable forum for sharing and discussing good practice and innovative approaches to teaching. We would like to illustrate this issue by making reference to the EU-sponsored LLP Erasmus Program. This program allows university students to spend a period in a foreign institution and to acquire learning credits that are fully recognized by the home university. Generally, studies that have evaluated students’ experience of study abroad report high levels of satisfaction by students. In particular, a Norwegian study listed academic, social, personal, linguistic, and cultural benefits (Wiers-Jenssen, 2003). Furthermore, two reports suggested that exchange programs facilitate cognitive growth (Frisch, 1990; Zorn et al., 1995). Frisch (1990), for example, documented the change of senior students’ levels of cognition over one academic semester. The results reported in her study indicated that those who participated in an international student nurse exchange program demonstrated significantly more growth than those who did not. Furthermore, Haloburdo and Thompson (1998) indicated that all study abroad students experienced a greater appreciation for cultural differences and became more sensitive to the feelings of minorities within a society. The European Federation of Psychology Students Associations (EFPSA) also encourages students’ mobility within Europe by providing its members with the opportunity for international exchanges. The member association in the hosting country is required to prepare programs of activities related to psychology, society, and everyday life. There are several positive features of the Erasmus Program that we see as related to becoming a psychologically literate citizen. The program requires students to solve practical problems, such as finding housing in the city where they will be staying; experiencing and comparing different teaching and learning environments, and fostering the possibility of analyzing and evaluating them; and being exposed to teaching and cultural diversity, thereby broadening students’ perspectives. Thus, the program allows the perceptive student to benefit both personally and academically. This may be particularly formative for Italian students, who tend to (a) live in their parents’ house until they are quite old (recent journalistic reports estimate up to 35 years) and (b) enroll in a university on the basis of its vicinity to their home rather than on the basis of teaching and research strengths in their area of interest. According to a report by Almalaurea, an inter-university consortium aiming at connecting universities, the labor market, and professionals, in 2009, 10.6% of Italian university students spent a study period abroad. The corresponding figure for students attending a bachelor’s program in psychology was 5.3%. Among these, 1.8% did so through the Erasmus Program (Almalaurea, 2010). The comparison does not speak favorably for psychology students, and this is both surprising and worrisome. It is surprising because psychology is increasingly a


175

cross-cultural and an international field. In addition, psychology students should be intellectually curious, ready to experience and understand other cultures and minds. The observation, too, is worrisome because it portrays students of psychology as less dynamic than one may wish, and less prone to mobility than may be expected for psychology’s role in enhancing awareness of cultural diversity and richness, favoring autonomy, and allowing exposure to, and comparison among, educational systems. Perhaps a way to enhance students’ motivation and willingness to spend a period of study in another country or culture would be to have students explicitly communicate and build upon some of the features that make a person a psychologically literate citizen, in particular creative approaches to problem solving and disciplined analysis of information to evaluate alternative courses of action. From this perspective, in addition to providing students with already established institutional exchange and cooperation programs, students should be encouraged to actively propose, on the bases of their experience and their goals, projects and activities involving mobility and cross-country cooperation. In the same vein, relating some aspects of the didactic activity to the crosscultural aspects of cognition and behavior, such as cultural effects on cognition (e.g., ingroup and outgroup dynamics), may draw attention to, and make students aware of, the fruitfulness of being sensitive to cultural diversity not only from the point of view of the scientific study of the mind (Heirich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010), but also as a means to broaden one’s horizons and to try to avoid as much as possible egocentric and ethnocentric attitudes in science, in the profession, and in life.

Concluding Remarks We have claimed that psychological literacy is best viewed as a process developing over time, in different contexts, and incrementally. We would also add that it is a collaborative process, involving students, teachers, and citizens. Each is responsible for contributing to the process in one’s own role by integrating positive and pro-active attitudes and actions, by being aware—and making the people involved aware—of one’s possibilities and limitations, and by sharing one’s goals, competence, and expertise with the others. For academic staff, the contribution to the process starts before the actual interaction with students, in the curriculum design phase. We believe that incorporating aspects of curriculum design that we have briefly presented will give the process of becoming psychologically literate a smooth and allegro con brio start.

References Almalurea (2009). L’indagine 2010—Profilo dei laureati 2009. Available at: http://www. almalaurea.it/universita/profilo.

176


Bandura, A. (1991). Self-efficacy mechanism in physiological activation and healthpromoting behavior. In J. Madden, IV (Ed.), Neurobiology of learning, emotion and affect (pp. 229–270). New York: Raven. Forgas, J. P., & Fitness, J. (Eds.). (2008). Social relationships: cognitive, affective and motivational processes. New York: Psychology Press. Frisch, N. (1990). An international nursing exchange programme: an educational experience that enhanced student cognitive development. Journal of Nursing Education, 29, 10–12. Gonzalez, J., & Wagenaar, R. (Eds). (2008). Universities’ contribution to the Bologna Process Tuning Education Structures in Europe. General brochure. University of Deusto. Haloburdo, E., & Thompson, M. (1998). A comparison of international learning experiences for baccalaureate nursing students: developed and developing countries. Journal of Nursing Education, 37, 13–21. Heirich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most people are not WEIRD. Nature, 466, 29. Job, R., Tonzar, C., & Lotto, L. (2009). Italian university curricula in psychology: an appraisal of the EuroPsy Project. In S. McCarthy, V. Karandashev, M. Stevens, A. Thatcher, J. Jaafar, K. Moore, A. Trapp, & C. Brewer, (Eds.), Teaching Â�psychology around the world (pp. 308–317). Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Job, R., Tonzar, C., & Lotto, L. (2010). Developing psychology teaching resources in Italy. Paper presented at the 4th ICOPE Conference, Sydney, July 8–11. Lunt, I., Bartram, D., Döpping, J. Georgas, J., Jern, S., Job, R., Lecuyer, R., Newstead, S., Nieminen, P., Odland, S., Peiró, J.M., Poortinga, Y., Roe, R., Wilpert, B., & Herman, E. (2001). EuroPsyT: a framework for education and training for psychologists in Europe. Report by Project EuroPsyT, funded by the Leonardo da Vinci Programme. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from www.europsych.org. Lunt, I., Gorbeña, S., Job, R., Lecuyer, R., & Peiró, J.M. (in press). TUNING-EUROPSY: reference points for the design and delivery of degree programmes in psychology. University of Deusto. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Roe, R. A. (2002). What makes a competent psychologist? European Psychologist, 7, 192–203. Shapiro, J. P., & Stefkovich, J. A. (2005). Ethical leadership and decision making in education: applying theoretical perspectives to complex dilemmas. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Trimble, J. E. (2003). Cultural competence and cultural sensitivity. In M. Prinstein & M. Patterson (Eds.), The portable mentor: expert guide to a successful career in Â�psychology. New York: Kluwer. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.


177

Wiers-Jenssen, J. (2003). Norwegian students abroad: experiences from a linguistically and geographically peripheral European country. Studies in Higher Education, 28, 391–411. Zorn, C. R., Ponick, D. A., & Peck, S. D. (1995). An analysis of the impact of participation in an international study program on the cognitive development of senior baccalaureate nursing students. Journal of Nursing Education, 34, 67–70.

13 An Indonesian Perspective on Psychological Literacy Sarlito Wirawan Sawono

P

sychological literacy encapsulates the common graduate attributes or capabilities that students should acquire while undertaking an undergraduate major in psychology, and includes capabilities in basic knowledge, scientific thinking and research skills, critical and creative problem solving, ethical attitudes and behavior, effective communication, respect for diversity, being insightful and reflective about one’s own and other’s behaviors, and applying psychological principles in personal, interpersonal, and organizational contexts (McGovern et al., 2010). I will argue in this chapter that psychology in Indonesia has been fostering psychological literacy in its students and also in its population (through the popular media) for the past 60 years. As such, the story of psychological literacy in Indonesia is quite different from that for Western countries, and in telling this story, I will take a very personal view. When I joined the faculty of psychology at the University of Indonesia as a student in 1961, almost nobody knew about psychology. To most people in Indonesia at that time, psychology meant psychiatry, and psychiatry equaled disturbed minds. Thus I chose the faculty of psychology not because I had sufficient knowledge about the study program (what did I know as a high school graduate?), but because I was being obedient to my dad. He said, “It will be better for you if you study psychology. Psychology is new in Indonesia. And as one of the first people who study it, you will get all the chances to be a pioneer and pioneers always have the first chance to be successful.” In 2006, Professor Dr. Ray Fowler, who is currently the president of International Association of Applied Psychology (2010–2014), mentioned in his keynote speech at the first convention of the Asian Psychological Association in Bali that in terms of the popularity of psychology among laypeople, Indonesia is second only to Brazil. He is right. In Indonesia today, everybody talks about psychology. Parents and schoolteachers talk about IQ tests for their children and students, human resource managers in companies use psychological assessment techniques in their recruitment and selection programs, managers and bureaucrats talk about the “Need for Achievement” and “Self-Actualization,” husbands and wives look for

An Indonesian Perspective on Psychological Literacy

179

marriage counseling, and printed as well as electronic media provide special programs on psychology, ranging from child and developmental psychology to the psychology of love. Marketing managers and advertisers use psychology in developing their marketing strategies and commercials. Psychology is used also by the police, the military, the ministry of social affairs, and by doctors, lawyers, clerics, and many other professions, including accountants. On one occasion I was hired as a psychology consultant by the internal control director of a national electronic company, when there was a chronic unsolvable dispute between its finance and accounting departments. However, most importantly, hardly any Indonesians anymore think that psychology means mentally ill people, and I have never regretted obeying my father, although I was then already registered with the faculty of economics at the University of Indonesia.1

Birth of Psychology in Indonesia In 1952, an Indonesian psychiatrist of the University of Indonesia, Professor Dr. Slamet Iman Santoso, declared that there were too many mentally disturbed persons after the independence war. Indonesia declared its independence on Aug. 17, 1945, and this was followed by the war against the Dutch colonial military force. After the Dutch left in 1949, there were many important posts in government administration as well as in the private sector that needed to be filled by Indonesian personnel, who mostly were not prepared for those positions. This social change was the cause of the problem faced by Professor Santoso. At the same time, Professor Santoso also observed in his psychiatric practice that there were many mentally disturbed children and high school dropouts due to the mismatch between the criteria required by a school and the academic potential of the children. So, again, psychologists were urgently needed in Indonesia (Sarwono, 2003). Therefore, Professor Santoso urged psychologists to begin to work with psychiatrists in Indonesia. In 1953 a psychology program was founded in the faculty of medicine at the University of Indonesia (UI); later, Professor Santoso became known as the father of Indonesian psychology. In 1960, the status of the psychology program was upgraded to an independent department within the university, and it became the first department of psychology in Indonesia. Professor Santoso became its first dean, and I was a student of the second cohort of the faculty. Before then, the students were registered as psychology students of the faculty of medicine at UI. Four years later, in 1964, Padjadjaran University (Bandung) and Gajah Mada University (Yogyakarta) founded their departments of psychology, followed by universities in other cities, state schools as well as private universities. Today there are 95 departments of

1. The faculty of economy at the University of Indonesia produced the best economists in Indonesia. Many of its graduates have become ministers or have obtained other key positions in the country, including ambassadors.

180

T h e P sy c hologi c ally L it e rat e Citi z e n

psychology throughout Indonesia. In Jakarta alone there are around 20 departments of psychology in different universities (Himpsi, 2008). In its early years, the department of psychology at UI was very clinical in its orientation (a consequence of being a part of a medical faculty). Professor Santoso’s interest then was very simple: to prevent mental disturbances by having “the right man in the right place.” Hence, the role of psychology was to detect in advance when there was a possibility of “the wrong man in the wrong place” by implementing psychological tests, and to provide psychological therapy or counseling to already mentally disturbed persons (Sarwono, 2003). The department of psychology at Padjadjaran University in Bandung was also clinically oriented. Padjajaran University, also a state university like UI, used military psychologists who had just returned from studying psychology in Germany as their first lecturers. Before World War II, Germany was the motherland of psychology, including psychoanalysis, where projective tests were the most important technique of psychology. Thus, projective tests, such as Rorschach, DAM (Draw A Man), Wartegg drawing completion test, and TAT (Thematic Apperception Test), were taught at Padjadjaran University. In contrast, the psychology department in Gajah Mada University, Yogyakarta, is more educational in orientation, because it was born from an education department at the same university. The first prominent Indonesian quantitative psychologist, Professor Sutrisno Hadi, was also a lecturer at Gajah Mada University. His famous books on statistics and methodology (Hadi, 1966, 1969, 1970) were widely used in all departments of psychology until the 1980s, when they were replaced by the use of SPSS. Today, due to a strong American influence on the entire higher education system in Indonesia, including textbooks and visiting professors, all Indonesian departments of psychology run programs in clinical, educational, child, industrial and organizational, social, and all branches of psychology, using qualitative and quantitative methods, as well as psychoanalytical, behavioral, cognitive, humanistic, and cultural paradigms.

From Practice to Theory Psychology in Indonesia was born from the practical need of applied psychology. Professor Dr. Fuad Hassan brought Indonesian psychology into the theoretical field. He was the first graduate of the psychology program when it was still part of the medical faculty at UI (1958). In 1967 he wrote his monumental dissertation, “Neurosis as an existential conflict” (the first psychology dissertation in Indonesia), which later was published as the classic book on psychology and philosophy entitled Kita dan Kami, the Two Basic Modes of Togetherness (1971).2 Fuad Hassan 2. In Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian language) there are expressions that are not known in Western languages. They are kami, which means I and my friends (you are not included), and


181

himself became the Indonesian ambassador to Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, and Jibouti (1976–1998), and Minister of Education and Culture (1985–1993), while his dissertation still stimulates research, including other dissertations. In the 1980s, Professor Dr. Mulyono Gandadipura, also from UI, initiated a weekly program on Television of the Republic of Indonesia (TVRI), the only TV station at that time3 owned by the government, entitled Psikologi untuk Anda (“Psychology for You”) and published a psychology magazine called Anda (“You”). Professor Gandadiputra communicated about psychology with the TV audience and magazine readers in very simple, day-to-day language. He also involved his students as participants in the television program, which made them more interesting. His initiative proved very successful. Laypeople started to talk about psychology. Everybody would seek in psychology the solution to day-to-day problems. Since Professor Gandadiputra died in 1984, I had been fortunate to be able to work on popular psychology for the media. My first popular article was published in a national newspaper in 1972. In the late 1970s I wrote and edited psychology articles in different magazines and newspapers, including magazines for adolescents and young adults. In 1982 to 1985 I had my own weekly radio broadcast forum on sexual psychology, and 10 years later, from 1992 to 1996, I was involved in a weekly family quiz TV show, which was the first of its kind run by a private TV station. Today I no longer have any regular program in printed or electronic media, but my articles are still continuously published in magazines and newspapers, and I am still frequently invited by different TV stations to take part in various talk shows on psychology-related problems, ranging from mutilation and pedophilic cases to narcotics and terrorism. I was not alone in popularizing psychology. Prominent psychologists who were active in different fields included Sartono Mukadis (social issues), Seto Mulyadi (preschool education and child protection), Saparinah Sadli (female psychology), Djamaludin Ancok (population and environment), A. S. Munandar (industrial and organizational psychology), U. C. Munandar (creativity), John S. Nimpuno (graphology), Sutarlinah Sukaji (quantitative methodology), and Singgih Gunarsa (sports). There were also local psychologists for local printed and electronic media, as well as local talk shows and presentations. In other words, the history of Indonesian psychology is different from the history of psychology in the Western world. In the West, psychology was born from theory. Socrates and his philosopher colleagues and followers had speculated about the concept of body and mind since 400 b.c. Then the British philosophers, such as John Locke, came in the 17th and 18th centuries. From France we know kita, meaning all of us, you and your people, I and my group. For Indonesians, the spirit of kita (kekitaan) is very important in maintaining psychological well-being. Losing the meaning of kekitaan in one’s life may lead to neuroticism. 3. Today Indonesia has 11 private national TV stations, and many more local TV stations and cable TV channels.

182


of René Descartes with his cogito ergo sum. The physiologists came in later with their experiments, including Gustave Theodore Fechner (perception) and Ivan Petrovich Pavlov (conditioned reflex) (Sarwono, 1980; Weiten, 2010). In continental Europe, philosophy and physiology merged in Wilhelm Wundt’s classic psychological research and similarly in William James’ classic work in the United States. Each is considered as the father of psychology in his respective continent, and both were medical doctors who changed to philosophy in their later career. Then there was the era when the emphasis of psychology was practical psyÂ�chology, in terms of individual intervention through Freudian psychoanalysis, Rogerian client-centered therapy, as well as Skinnerian behavior therapy (Sarwono, 1980; Weiten, 2010). It was Hugo Münsterberg (1907), however, who is considered to be the creator of applied psychology after he published his nine books on forensic psychology, applying psychology to education, industrial efficiency, business, and teaching (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_psychology; Kimble et al., 1991). As we know, there were long arguments between psychologists in America on this matter. There are psychologists who prefer to stay at the theoretical level. Applied psychology is considered as too reductionist, and losing the essence of human experience. It is also considered as too positivistic, unscientific, distorted, and misleading (Baron & Byrne, 2000). However, there are also psychologists who would see psychology as an applied science, which can directly improve the human psychological well-being. Thirty to 40 years later, these pragmatic groups of psychologists have won the heart of the public, making more and more people want to study psychology. Figure 13.1 depicts the differences between the history of psychology in Indonesia and in the West.

Psychology by Non-psychologists Another significant development in the history of Indonesian psychology is a policy that allows non-psychology first degree holders, following a bridging program, to study psychology at the masters and doctoral levels. The policy, commencing in the early 1990s, was a breakthrough, because in the past this was West

Indonesia Academics Practice Applied

• Wundt • James • Freud • Rogers • Münsterberg

Practice

• Santoso

Academics

• Hassan

Applied

Figure 13.1â•‡ History of psychology in Indonesia as compared to the West.

• Gandadiputra • Sarwono


183

not possible. It was previously thought that there was a greater risk of malpractice with non-psychology (compared to psychology) first degree holders4 following masters- or doctoral-level training in psychology. However, it is clear today that this is not the case. There are now education-trained personnel, health, medical, and paramedical personnel, lawyers, managers, architects, journalists, graphic designers, and other degree holders or professions studying masters- and doctoral-level psychology. Psychology is becoming increasingly popular, and it is applied in different segments of life. One of my students, for example, is a member of the health personnel working for the Indonesian Red Cross, and he is doing his masters thesis on the psychological factors of debriefing nurses after they serve survivors of a disaster. My other student has a masters degree in forestry and is a high-ranking official at the Indonesian Ministry of Forestry; he has written a dissertation on identifying psychological aspects in carrying out the process of investigation in the Inspectorate General of the ministry. For her psychology masters thesis, an urban planner studied the social psychological dynamics of the inhabitants of Kebayoran Baru (part of Jakarta) to uncover why this area, which used to be a quiet residential area 50 years ago, now has become a busy business area. Table 13.1 presents a list of dissertations under my supervision in the past 6 years, which might reflect the broadening research interests in psychology, not only by psychologists, but also by non-psychologists. Because they are dissertations, the titles show they are mostly theoretical, although based on empirical data and practical need. They also use sophisticated methodological techniques and analytical paradigms. Even the non-psychologists contribute significantly to the theoretical development of Indonesian psychology. In contrast, if we look at the Indonesian psychology journals5 we can see that most of the articles are practical. In Table 13.2, we can see that many are triggered by very concrete day-to-day problems, such as premarital sexual behavior, aspirations of gifted children in accelerated classes, local traditions, and political behavior. Many use only correlational techniques to analyze the data, and end the article with a simple solution to the specific problem or with further research questions. The implication of the trends shown in Tables 13.1 and 13.2 is that there are nonpsychologists who study psychology seriously until the doctoral level, whereas some of the psychologists themselves are more interested in simple research in trying to answer pragmatic issues only.

4. The psychology higher education system until the early 1990s was very much a replica of medical school. The education is an exclusive 5.5-year program where graduates are Â�considered as full psychologists with the right to execute psychological testing and provide Â�psychological counseling. 5. Most of the journals are published by the faculties of psychology, not by professional organizations.

Table 13.1â•‡ List of 2005–2010 Dissertations Supervised by Professor Dr. Sarlito W. Sarwono

Name

Title of Dissertation

Year

1st & 2nd Degrees

University

Ahmad Zubaidi

The influence of interpersonal and intra-psychical components towards moral development (a study among students of UPI/YAI–University of Persada Indonesia/YAI–Jakarta)

2005

Psychology

University of Indonesia

Jafar Sembiring

The influence of transformational leadership towards the learning organization and the company’s success (A study in East Java Regional Division of Telkom Co.)

2005

Psychology


Seger Handoyo

Study on organizational and top management’s issue interpretation in terms of strategic changes in higher education

2005

Psychology


Silverius Y. Soeharso

Labor Social representation as an antecedent towards the labors’ intention to participate collective action (an integrated paradigm)

2006

Psychology


Irmawati

Motivational values that determines the success of Batak Toba people (an indigenous psychology study)

2007

Psychology


Christina Handayani

The changing values among young females in Yogyakarta

2007

Psychology


Mohamad Tamar

Entrepreneur motivational value among Bugis businessmen.

2007

Psychology

Charletty Choesyana Soffat (UIN/State Islamic University Jakarta)

Character building through family education: comparative study of Al Ghazali’s and Kornadt theories

2008

Islamic Studies Islamic State & University Psychology

Petrus Golose

Management of hacking crime by IT and Cybercrime Unit, Department of Detective and Crime of the Indonesian Police

2008

Police Studies University of Indonesia

Rycko Amelza Dahniel

Police bureaucracy in City Police resort of Sukabumi

2008


Aries Budiman

Police function in restoring social serene in the area of City Police Ressort of Pangkal Pinang

2008


Benny Jozua Mamoto

Al-Jamaah al Islamiyah: organization, terror activities and the police’s resolution Effect of moral integrity and adversity management toward work synergy at the Ministry of Forestry with team work as mediator

2008

Police Studies University of Indonesia Forestry Persada Indonesia University

Agus Mulyono

2010


Table 13.2â•‡ List of Journal Articles Published in the Indonesian Journals of Psychology in 2008 and 2009

Name of Journal

Volume

Topics

Authors

Journal of Social Psychology

January 2008, 14(1), 1–10.

Relation between individualism-collectivism cultural value and conflict resolution style

Pritta Devayani Wishnuwardhani & Wustari Mangundjaya


January 2008, 14(1), 11–24

Relation between thankfulness to God and subjective well-being among the poor

Nurul Arbiyah, Fivi Nurwianti, & Imelda Ika Dian Oriza


January 2008, 14(1), 25–38

Introducing pocket money management and saving to children of Al Bahar residence

Yuslikha K. Wardhani & M. Enoch Markum


January 2008, 14(1), 39–50

The effect of political socialization through tarbiyah toward political involvement among university students

Iman Septian Nurrohman & Hamdi Muluk


January 2008, 14(1), 51–64.

Argumentativeness trait expectation and selfmonitoring trait among electoral marketÂ� place candidates at the University of Indonesia

Reysa Aretha Nasroen & Rudolf Woodrow Matindas


January 2008, 14(1), 65–80

Analysis of employees’ work motivation in “X” family-company and the perceived next generation leadership

Petrina Winoto & Indarwahyanti Graito

Review Journal of Gifted and Creativity

February 2009, 3(1), 1–12

Future-oriented education and the career options among students of high school accelerated program and regular program

Silvia Noviyanti & Lydia Freyani Hawadi


February 2009, 3(1), 13–26

Interrelations among self regulation, selfefficacy, learning environment at home, intelligence and study achievement.

Arniati Prasedyawati Herkusumo, Utami Munandar, & Engelina Bonang


February 2009, 3(1), 27–37

Relation between self-concept and social adjustment among acceleration class students of Public Junior High School II and PL Domenico Savio Junior High School, at Semarang

Wima Bin Ary, Tri Rejeki Andayani, & Dian Ratna Sawitri


February 2009, 3(1), 38–51

Interrelation between academic self-esteem, creativity and study achievement among 10- to 12-year-old children

Ranti Widiyanti, Soemiarti Patmonodewo, & Miranda D. Zarfiel


August 2008, 2(2), 67–77

Relation between spare-time activities and creativity among adolescence

Medianta Tarigan & Budi Andayani


August 2008, 2(2), 78–89

The contribution of Adversity quotient toward learning achieveÂ� ment among students of accelerated Senior High School Program in Jakarta

Anik Budi Utami & Reni Akbar-Hawadi


August 2008, 2 (2), 90–102

The difference in the level of verbal creativity between students of accelerated and regular programs of Senior High School Program

Asri Prahesti & Retno Kumolohadi


August 2008, 2(2), 103–115

Adversity quotient (AQ) and achievement motivation among students of accelerated and regular programs

Suheil Fahmi & Ratna Syifa’a Rachmahana (Continued)


Name of Journal

Volume

Topics

Authors


August 2008, 2(2), 116–127

Relation between peer group acceptance and academic achievement among students of junior high school accelerated program

Maria Dhamayanti Santoso & Reni Akbar-Hawadi

Scientific Journal of Indigenous Psychology

May 2008, 10 (1), 3–18

Premarital sexual behavior related to attitude toward Eros and Ludus kinds of love and erotic fantasies

Wahyu Rahardjo


May 2008, 10(1), 19–28

Adolescence attitude toward free sex behavior: is it more influenced by parents or peers?

Agustini Kadarwati, Sri Lestari, & Setia Asyanti


May 2008, 10(1), 29–39

Community sexual patterns among married couples

Sri Lestari, & Nisa Rachmach Nur Anganthi


May 2008, 10(1), 40–57

Lusi Nuryanti & Noor Rochmman Hadjam


May 2008, 10(1), 58–67

Effectiveness of breastfeeding education program to pregnant mothers to increase motivation of providing exclusive mother’s milk Relation between group cohesiveness and organizational commitment among the employees of the Muhamadiyah University, Surakarta

Compiled and translated by Professor Sarlito W. Sarwono, 2010.

Achmad Dwityanto Oktaviansyah


189

Conclusions In its relatively short history, psychology in Indonesia has become very popular among other disciplines and professionals, and even among laypeople. Unlike in the West, psychology in Indonesia has been instigated by practical needs identified and expressed by Professor Dr. Slamet Iman Santoso, who is a non-psychologist. The theory came a few years later and the applied part of the science emerged around 25 years after the birth of Indonesian psychology in 1953. Although I have never seen any study to support Professor Ray Fowler’s statement, based on my international and national experience, I believe that during its 57 years of history, psychological literacy in Indonesia is much higher than in the United States (with its history of over 150 years) and even Europe (with its “history” since 400 years before the Christian era). Every individual (not only Indonesians) has a need for psychology. The need to understand oneself, communicate with others, raise one’s children, and many more issues, basically is the root of the need for psychology. Thus, when some Indonesian psychologists took the initiative to bring psyÂ� chology to the Indonesian people, and the media supported them, the people responded enthusiastically, and everybody wanted to study psychology, by taking either (a) formal education at universities (that is why the number of departments of psychology has grown very rapidly), (b) informal self-education in the media, or (c) short courses or one-day seminars, some of which are organized commercially by private entities.6 Today psychology as a profession is widely recognized, including by government institutions, the military, and the police. This gives a very good prospective for psychology in Indonesia.

References Baron, R. A., & Byrne, D. (2000). Social psychology (9th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hadi, S. (1966). Tjara Menghitung, Validita, Reliabilita dan Analisa Item dan Tehnik Korelasi (Ways of calculating validity, realibility and item analysis and correlational techniques). Yogyakarta: Jajasan Penerbit FIP-IKIP. Hadi, S. (1969). Statistik Psychologi dan Pendidikan (Psychological and Educational Statistics). Yogyakarta: Jajasan Penerbit Fakultas Psychologi Universitas Gajah Mada. Hadi, S. (1970). Metodologi Research, Penulisan Paper Field-Study, Skripsi-Thesis dan Disertasi (Research method, field study report, script-thesis and dissertation writing): Djil.1. Yogyakarta: Jajasan Penerbit Fakultas Psychologi Universitas Gajah Mada. Hassan, F. (2009). Kita dan Kami; Sebuah Analisis tentang Modus Dasar Kebersamaan (Kita and Kami: an analysis of basic mode of togetherness). Jakarta: Penerbit Winoka. Himpsi (Himpunan Psikologi Indonesia) (2008). List of faculties of psychology. 6. One of the currently most popular and most expensive psychological training programs on self-development is called “ESQ” (Emotional and Spiritual Quotient) and is run by a nonpsychologist, Mr. Ary Ginanjar Agustian.

190


Kimble, G. A., Wertheimer, M., & White, C. L. (Eds.) (1991). Portraits of pioneers in psychology. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Sarwono, S. W. (1980). Berkenalan dengan tokoh-tokoh dan aliran-aliran psikologi (Introducing authors and schools in psychology). Jakarta: Bulan Bintang. Sarwono, S. W. (2003). Dari yang pertama ke yang Utama, The Golden Anniversary of the Faculty of Psychology, University of Indonesia, Jakarta: Faculty of Psychology, University of Indonesia. Waiten, W. (2010). Psychology: themes and variations (8th ed). Belmont: Wadsworth.

14 A U.K. Perspective on Psychological Literacy and Citizenship Annie Trapp and Jacqueline Akhurst

I

n this chapter we explore the terms psychological literacy and the psychological literate citizen (McGovern et al., 2010) from the perspective of the United Kingdom. We then consider ways in which psychology undergraduate programs might contribute to these graduate attributes. Within the United Kingdom the term psychological literacy is used in different ways. Increasingly, it is used by media and business organizations to refer to an individual’s capacity to understand psychological aspects of situations and psychological awareness relating to the self and others. The term resonates with two criteria in McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) definition of psychological literacy, namely “Applying psychological principles to personal, social, and organizational issues in work, relationships, and the broader community” (p. 11) and “Being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behavior and mental processes” (p. 11). Within education, however, the term psychological literacy is used as a convenient shorthand description to encapsulate the desired attributes gained through studying psychology. It is this interpretation of psychological literacy that will be discussed in this chapter.

Concepts of Psychological Literacy and Citizenry The acquisition of psychological literacy is not unique to psychology graduates. Other graduates, particularly those from the health sciences, sports sciences, and business management, will have studied aspects of psychology relevant to these subject areas. In addition, there are many others who study some psychology during their professional training in—for example, childcare, occupational therapy, medicine, and teaching (Barker, 2007; BeSST, 2010; Child, 2007). At pre-tertiary level, psychology has become a popular subject taught at Key Stages 4 and 5 (typically 14- to 18-yearolds), including the following U.K. qualifications: General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) examinations, Scottish Higher Still, AS-level, A-level, International

192

T he P s y cho l ogica l ly Lite r ate C iti z e n

Baccalaureate, Diplomas, and Foundation degrees. In short, many thousands of individuals across the United Kingdom are engaging with psychological knowledge at different stages of their educational and professional development, and this is before we consider the untold number who engage with psychology through the everexpanding “pop psychology” sources in the media. We therefore need to ask: To what extent are all the above groups “psychologically literate”? This question raises the issue of whether the concept of psychological literacy is sufficiently robust to be treated as a competency that can be observed and measured, or whether the reader feels comfortable with McGovern and associates’ (2010) vaguer terms such as “basic psychological literacy” (p. 12) and “core concepts of psychological literacy that can become even more sophisticated” (p. 13) and a developmental process whereby psychologically literate citizens “build on their psychological literacy” (p. 20). The term citizen has implicit values that would call into question whether the term psychological literate citizen is a desired goal for psychology education. Arthur and Bohlin (2009) write: “The role of citizenship and civic responsibility in higher education is a highly contested yet crucial element of any consideration of the role of university in society” (p. 2). In the United Kingdom, this is especially so, where “citizenship” might be construed as being required to conform and comply rather than following the rich tradition of activism and dissent that has led to positive societal change over the past century. Among faculty staff members in psychology, further challenges relate to the values embedded in the construct and the intellectual and practical pressures related to delivering theoretically rigorous programs. Citizenship is a complex and nuanced concept in the four home countries that constitute the United Kingdom (i.e., England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland) (Pattie et al., 2004). People in the United Kingdom are anything but united in their identification nationally, and there are variable constructions of the term and its implications. Faulks (2000) noted both confusion and misunderstanding surrounding the term among prominent politicians, and Pattie and coworkers (2004) note that people in the United Kingdom are more likely to identify with either their home country or region (e.g., Yorkshire) than with a more general “British” identity. The picture is further complicated by the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Union and the mixed attitudes to being considered a part of Europe. From a politically conservative approach, “citizenship” may be used in discourses related to “nationalism” and “Britishness,” but more progressive and critical voices would express great discomfort with the way in which such terms cover up notions of power and dominance. For some, therefore, citizenship implies having the right to protest and to hold governmental officers to account when principles of ethics and democracy appear to conflict with, for example, economic developments. One domain in which ideas related to citizenship are hotly contested relates to the pressures being experienced in the United Kingdom due to immigration. In the past decade this has been evidenced by more rigorous policing of actual borders, and within the past 5 years the hurdles posed for those wishing to become

A U.K. Perspective on Psychological Literacy and Citizenship

193

a “citizen” have become increasingly challenging, with persons applying for the right to remain having to undertake a “Life in the United Kingdom” citizenship test (The Home Office, 2007). These tests expose a particular set of governmental constructs of the background knowledge that an advisory group believes should underpin citizenship (e.g., “women in Britain today,” “religion and tolerance,” and the formal institutions and devolved administration), yet they appear to contain little related to contemporary British life. It is therefore useful to briefly explore a concept of citizenship with which people in the United Kingdom might feel comfortable, and therefore support. There are rich narratives celebrating the degrees of diversity and difference that it is possible to express in the United Kingdom, and constructions of citizenship reflect such differences, to some extent. In the increasingly multicultural U.K. society, where there is a high level of openness to global engagement, Pattie and colleagues (2004) found commonality in ideas of citizenship related to volunteering, charitable giving, and civic duties linked to local government, and the majority of people surveyed supported features such as tolerance, loyalty to the rule of law, and support of the institutions of the state to redress imbalances and redistribute resources. The authors explore ideas of individual, relational, and collective notions of citizenship and write about the willingness of the majority of those surveyed to engage in the promotion of a civil society. Also writing in the United Kingdom, Rose (2005) drew attention to the “fragmenting” of former images of nation-states as the sources of political legitimacy and citizenship shift. Concepts related to citizenship need to recognize the multiple groups to which people give allegiance. It is evident that in the past decade, the weaknesses (and what Rose terms “inevitable failings”) of state provision of health and social care, education, policing, and general welfare are leading some people to form community and organizational groups to take back responsibilities for some of these. This is reflected in some of the policies of the newly elected coalition government (2010), where the devolving of power to local levels is being promoted. However, to engage in this way, people need to feel a sense of “agency” and feel able to assert their legitimate rights and work in cooperation with local government. Such “community-based” activity will require greater discussion related to citizenship and the shift from power vested centrally to greater devolution. Pattie and colleagues (2004) cautioned that in the United Kingdom there has been little in formal education curricula related to citizenship, with much having been left to either the family or informal opportunities for gaining knowledge (often through engagement in local organizations and social groups). The increase in economic inequalities in the United Kingdom in the past two decades (Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009) is another factor that makes citizen engagement challenging; however, in the context of the recent economic crisis, as well as the post-election negotiations that led to greater public awareness of the trade-offs that need to be made, ideas and policy decisions have been more openly debated in public. Therefore, while the concept of “citizen” may be laden with “good” and involves working towards a just and equal society based upon democratic principles, the experiences of some citizens (particularly those who feel marginalized) may not reflect

194


these values. One could argue that the psychologically literate graduate needs to be exposed to and engage in debating such notions, since they have such a profound impact on concepts such as identity and relations between the individual and the collective, and they are imbued with power dynamics of influence, authority, and social justice. While such issues are likely to be covered in certain organizational and particularly in community psychology courses, it is hard to envisage their universal incorporation in undergraduate programs accredited by the British Psychological Society, where the priority is focused on seven core areas of study: cognitive psychology, biological psychology, social psychology, developmental psychology, individual differences, conceptual and historical issues, and research methods. It is easy to become distracted by striving for stipulative definitions and end up with “artificial, hermetically sealed boundaries which do not reflect the subtle twists and nuances of language in use” (Fleming, 2006, p. 1). This is not our intention, because there is much to admire in McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) vision for rethinking the why and the how of psychology education and evaluating the attributes that psychology graduates possess. Moreover, we would argue that psychology educators have a growing responsibility to respect the developmental needs of an increasingly large and diverse student body. This means not only preparing students for careers in research and professional psychology but also ensuring that students graduate with the confidence and ability to apply their psychological literacy to all areas of their lives. So, with caveats around the definition and measurement of psychological literacy and the contested nature of citizenship put to one side, we will describe some of the ways in which U.K. psychology education both meets and falls short of McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) vision.

Attributes of U.K. Psychology Education There is no standardized curriculum for psychology education either at pretertiary level or tertiary level in the United Kingdom, but at pre-tertiary level criteria are set by the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency. These form the basis for a variety of examination boards to develop their own examination specifications. Table 14.1 describes the aims and learning outcomes for psychology in the GCSE, typically studied at 14 to 16 years of age, and the General Certificate of Education (GCE) A-level, typically studied at 16 to 18 years of age. At pre-tertiary level, the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency criteria has placed psychology within the traditional sciences. This can be regarded as a significant step for psychology in pre-tertiary education in that it mandates psychology being taught from a scientific viewpoint and by teachers qualified to teach science. The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA, 2010) subject benchmarks provide guidance on core areas of psychology to be covered in an undergraduate degree and also describe the desired graduate outcomes (Table 14.2). These benchmarks have


195

similarities with the American Psychological Association’s guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major (APA, 2007). However, in contrast to the U.S. undergraduate model of a collection of subjects, majors and minors, psychology students at U.K. universities begin their studies at the equivalent of a U.S. second year, and the majority immediately specialize solely in the study of psychology (a minority might study psychology in conjunction with one other academic discipline). The outcomes in these tables match reasonably well with McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) definition of psychological literacy (p. 11), although the attributes of an undergraduate psychology graduate, as defined in the QAA subject benchmarks, have a narrower scientific focus. Most noticeably, the statements say nothing about the ability to apply psychological principles, although it could be argued

Table 14.1â•‡ GCSE and GCE A-level Subject Criteria for Psychology

GCSE subject criteria for psychology, December 2007, QCA/07/3465 • Acquire knowledge and understanding of how psychology works and its essential role in society • Develop an understanding of the relationship between psychology and social, cultural, scientific and contemporary issues and its impact on everyday life • Develop an understanding of ethical issues in psychology • Develop an understanding of the contribution of psychology to individual, social and cultural diversity • Develop a critical approach to scientific evidence and methods

GCE A-level subject criteria for science (Psychology) Candidates must have an understanding of the major approaches in psychology including cognitive, biological, behavioural and psychodynamic. Knowledge and understanding must be related to: • the applications and implications of psychology to cultural, social and contemporary issues • the interrelationship between different areas of psychology • the scientific nature of psychology • the selection and application of knowledge and understanding of theories, concepts and approaches to the solution of problems • the design and reporting of investigations and drawing valid conclusions from them • the collection and analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data including the use of inferential statistics • the selection and application of knowledge and understanding of principles and perspectives • an appreciation of issues and/or debates in psychology.

196


Table 14.2â•‡ Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Subject Benchmarks for Psychology (2007) • Understand the scientific underpinnings of psychology as a discipline, its historical origins, development and limitations • Recognise the inherent variability and diversity of psychological functioning and its significance • Demonstrate systematic knowledge and critical understanding of a range of influences on psychological functioning, how they are conceptualised across the core areasâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯.â•¯and how they interrelate • Demonstrate detailed knowledge of several specialised areas and/or applications, some of which are at the cutting edge of research in the discipline • Demonstrate a systematic knowledge of a range of research paradigms, research methods and measurement techniques, including statistical analysis, and be aware of their limitations • Reason scientifically, understand the role of evidence and make critical judgments about arguments in psychology • Adopt multiple perspectives and systematically analyse the relationships between them • Detect meaningful patterns in behaviour and experience and evaluate their significance • Pose, operationalise and critique research questions • Demonstrate substantial competence in research skills through practical activities • Reason statistically and use a range of statistical methods with confidence • Competently initiate, design, conduct and report an empirically-based research project under appropriate supervision, and recognise its theoretical, practical and methodological implications and limitations • Be aware of ethical principles and approval procedures and demonstrate these in relation to personal study, particularly with regard to the research project, and be aware of the ethical context of psychology as a discipline. • Communicate ideas and research findings, both effectively and fluently, by written, oral and visual means • Comprehend and use numerical, statistical and other forms of data, particularly in the context of presenting and analysing complex data sets • Be computer literate and confident in using word processing, database and statistical software • Solve problems by clarifying questions, considering alternative solutions and evaluating outcomes • Be sensitive to, and react appropriately to, contextual and interpersonal factors in groups and teams (Continued)


197

Table 14.2â•‡ (continued) • Undertake self-directed study and project management, in order to meet desired objectives • Take charge of their own learning, and reflect and evaluate personal strengths and weaknesses for the purposes of future learning.

that this is implicit in the statements. In practice, many undergraduate courses pay considerable attention to ensuring that students can apply their learning in meaningful ways; in this respect it is misleading to rely on the subject benchmarks to describe graduate attributes from individual programs of study. However, the risks attached to the “narrowness” of the benchmarks listed above may very well encourage some academic teachers to focus on their own favorite theories and concepts rather than to think more broadly about the relevance and potential applications for their students (cf., Dunn et al., 2010). Attributes that can be equated to “respect for diversity” and “insight into others’ behaviour and mental processes” do not feature in the benchmark statements. While psychology graduates from many U.K. programs would be hard pressed to graduate without these attributes, we would support the articulation of such sentiments within the Â�benchmark statements. This analysis of these quality assurance documents at pre-tertiary and tertiary levels confirms that there is a high degree of overlap between the attributes of psychological literacy in U.K. psychology education and those defined by McGovern and associates (2010). Moreover, the documents ensure a level of national consistency. In other European countries the situation is very different: accreditation and quality assurance mechanisms at the discipline level are rare, and departments have much greater autonomy in what they teach (Trapp & Upton, 2010). This makes it difficult to assess the development of psychological literacy or to promote debate around the concept of psychological literacy at the national level within Europe. Initial work in this area is being undertaken as part of a European Union-funded project, EUROPLAT, which has as one of its aims the establishment of a community of practice around the teaching and learning of psychology (Trapp & Upton, 2010).

The Development of Psychology Literacy in the United Kingdom So far in this chapter we have described the extent to which psychology education affects tens of thousands of students’ lives and have satisfied ourselves that the concept of psychological literacy as defined by McGovern and associates (2010) is implicit in U.K. psychology education. The thrust, however, of McGovern and colleagues’ chapter is that as psychology educators we can go further and produce “future leaders” who can act in “socially responsible ways in local, national and global contexts.” During recent years there has been strong pressure from government policy for universities to focus on developing the skill and knowledge base for improved

198


economic productivity. This has been acknowledged in university programs through, for example, increased linkages with employers, more opportunities for work-based learning and the introduction of shorter, more vocationally oriented courses. Alongside these changes, universities are giving more consideration to identifying the distinctive attributes of their graduates in terms of their ethical values and social responsibilities. For example, the University of Aberdeen, as part of its curricular reform, lists the desired attributes of its graduates as academically excellent, critical thinkers and effective communicators; open to learning and personal development; and active citizens (University of Aberdeen, 2010); the University of Wolverhampton lists its distinctive graduate attributes as digital literacy, knowledgeable and enterprising, and global citizenship (University of Wolverhampton, 2010). We therefore need to ask: Are there ways in which psychology education can develop these “global” attributes? We will strive to respond to this question by following two themes below.

Psychological Literacy and the Curriculum First, we believe that the current undergraduate curriculum offers potential for the further development of psychological literacy and illustrate this through examples in the following paragraphs. We will trace these examples through aspects of the “core” British Psychological Society curriculum, and then mention some potential curriculum enhancements. Psychology has its roots in both philosophy and the natural sciences. These are evident in the central emphasis on research and evidence-based generation of knowledge and interventions. Psychology graduates therefore have the potential to be sophisticated consumers of the results and impacts of research, being able to critique the methodologies and analyses that are so frequently evident in the media and public domains today. Psychology teachers thus carry a responsibility to equip students with these capacities, exposing students to both the breadth and limitations of various approaches. Students need to be equipped to recognize both the pragmatic and philosophical roots and limits of statistical techniques (with reference to, e.g., Hacking’s [1990] The Taming of Chance) and the limitations of qualitative measures, in order to be able to engage more actively in public debate regarding the evidence upon which decisions are based. How psychology is perceived fundamentally influences how students approach their studies. It also plays a significant role in determining both the curriculum and the way that it is taught. We are referring to the constant struggle within the discipline to determine the extent to which psychology’s focus should be applied to the individual or to society. In our experience the majority of psychology students anticipate that their studies will focus on the individual. It is important therefore that students are encouraged from the outset of their studies to understand the relevance of psychology to society. Textbooks can play a role in this; indeed, it is becoming increasingly common for authors to make more explicit linkages between theory and its application to world events such as climate change,


199

terrorism, and cultural differences (see, e.g., Davey, 2008, p. 471, on culture and psychopathology), and contemporary social debates (e.g., lie detection, Davey, 2008, p. 386; or the wearing of cycle helmets, Davey, 2008, p. 328). It is important for students to value the contributions of scientific methods to informing research, but also to recognize that these are imperfect and are not “value-free”. The scientific discourse is a particular form of what some might term the “truth,” which has power vested within it. In the past decade, the BPS has given greater weight to so-called “qualitative” approaches to research, with their roots in postmodern critiques of reduction of human responses to numbers. In particular, exposure to the discourse analytic and conversational analysis approaches uncover the embedded power relationships and rhetorical devices in interactions, illustrating the “diversity of authorities and forces” (Rose, 2005, p. 5) in operation in various systems. Providing undergraduate students with this more sophisticated understanding of data use is no easy task. Some first-year psychology students are both surprised and challenged by statistics, and most receive little training in qualitative research methods. They may thus find it difficult to connect their experiences of some research methods and statistics modules with their expectation that a psychology degree will enable them “to help people”. Many first-year students, when asked why they want to study psychology, respond that they want “to help other people” (or variations on that theme) (Banyard et al., 2010). Such responses may be linked to our considerations about the promotion of psychologically literate citizens. How well does the psychology curriculum respond to the wish to contribute to well-being or, as unpacked by Rose (2005), the trends towards more ethical politics related to human and animal rights, the environment, health and reproduction, and shifts in family and living constellations? From the perspective of developmental psychology, psychological research is increasingly uncovering important cognitive and developmental mechanisms that can be used to guide childcare and educational practices. It is therefore a relatively simple step to link concepts such as Attachment Theory and cognitive and psychosocial development to students’ experiences and to policy applications. For example, MRI scans (Browne, 2009) have illustrated the extreme effects of institutionalization upon infants separated from their primary caregivers in Eastern Europe. These confirm the propositions of theories of attachment, and the results of sound attachment for cognitive and emotional functioning. The impacts of disruptions of attachment on brain structure and neuroanatomy are starkly illustrated by this work and have led to a recent EU directive that children under the age of 3 should not be housed in institutions. A further example is the promotion of literacy development through the understanding of language acquisition and the structures involved in enabling individuals to learn to read. In the United Kingdom, where about 60% of the prison population has difficulties in basic literacy skills (Clark & Dugdale, 2008), such work has wide-reaching impact, both in terms of the development of evidence-based reading programs in schools and links to individual and collective well-being. Since the majority of psychology students will go on to become (or already are) parents, and many go

200


on to teaching, youth work, and social care, the effects of learning applied developmental psychology could have a widespread impact. The teaching of social psychology also holds great promise for developing psychological literacy if applications of the research are made clear to students. It offers the potential for students to evaluate the standard studies of, for example, Zimbardo (Haney et al., 1973) and Milgram (1963) with a more critical eye, uncovering the complexity and nuanced nature of the data (often “smoothed over” by textbooks). There is also the rich vein of the work of some of the British social psychologists, such as Billig (1995), and their deconstruction of such concepts of citizenship, the U.K. involvement in the war in Iraq, and currently the Afghanistan conflict. Consideration of the impacts of conflict on societies and the role of psychology in ameliorating its effects, through work with survivors of violence or the peace psychology movement, could have lasting influences on both students’ attitudes and future practice. Furthermore, there is the potential to consider the impacts of natural disasters and the role psychology might play in triage work and beyond. The BPS requires that students cover “Conceptual and Historical Issues in Psychology” (CHIP) in the curriculum. In some universities this module has been conceptualized as a “capstone” module, drawing together many of the threads of the undergraduate degree (which as a result of the modularization of programs over the past two decades may not be connected). Such a module enables broader overarching themes to be tackled, such as the ethics of research and practice. Discussions of the underpinning foundations of ethical codes, such as “nonmaleficence” and “beneficence,” highlight the potential role of psychology graduates in challenging practices. This module is also well suited to considerations of such topics as philosophy of mind, taking students back to psychology’s roots in philosophy. Furthermore, there are strong views that psychology cannot be politically neutral, with those who assert such neutrality being confronted by ideas that they are adhering to and supporting the status quo and reproduction of “more of the same.” CHIP may be a module in which such debates might be discussed, highlighting the growing inequalities in resource distribution, continuing oppressive practices, and challenging over-control of research initiatives by governmental funding mechanisms. Psychology also has the potential to provide students with greater insight into the role of human behavior as it relates to environmental issues. Illustrations of how theories such as reinforcement, social learning, attitudes, judgment, and decision making can be related to environmental sustainability are provided by Scott and Koger (2006). Consideration may also be given to whether the concept of citizenship should be linked to global issues. An example might relate to the ethics of consumerism in terms of buying behavior, by, for example, encouraging students to become more insightful regarding the impact of our habits on people in developing countries. In the past 5 years in the United Kingdom, the links between unemployment and challenges to mental health and well-being have been charted (Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009). Thus, links between economic policy and healthcare have led to initiatives such as the Increasing Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) program being rolled out by the National Health Service (NHS) from 2007.


201

This program resulted from the work of a team led by the economist Layard (2006) where the cost-related impact of people out of work and “on benefits” (i.e., supported by the government) was tracked. The resulting model of economic saving from increased availability of counseling and psychotherapy persuaded the U.K. government to fund the IAPT program. Such programs illustrate the potential for psychology to be at the cutting edge of policy developments and highlight the need for psychology students to be engaging with ways of conceptualizing mental health, being equipped with capacities to challenge outmoded terms such as “abnormal psychology” and “psychopathology.” Through such examples, learners have the potential to become more inclusive and accepting of diversity of cognitive and emotional functioning and aware of the consequences of medicalization, and they have a greater understanding of social constructions of mental functioning. Excellent examples of how people who have experienced mental health services can contribute to the educational process are provided by the “U.K. Enhancing Learning and Teaching about Mental Health in Higher Education” group (Basset, Campbell, & Anderson, 2006). When reviewing the undergraduate curriculum as a whole, the balance of material covered in undergraduate psychology courses should also be considered. With modularization of courses there comes the danger of over-specialization and fragmentation of programs. It is not uncommon for third-year students to choose from a wide variety of modules, which are driven by the research interests of faculty, giving students the opportunity to engage with leading-edge research in, for example, eyewitness testimony or Parkinson’s disease. Specialized courses are invaluable for the minority of students who will become professional psychologists, but the reality is that only a minority of students will be involved either directly or indirectly in eyewitness testimony or affected by Parkinson’s disease, whereas the majority will be affected indirectly if not directly by mental health issues or environmental sustainability. Capstone courses that pull together the application of psychological knowledge with the aim of positioning it within the broader context of life can ameliorate the effects of fragmentation and over-specialization (e.g., Dunn & McCarthy, 2010), but in the United Kingdom such courses are few and far between. For many years there has been debate about the extent to which traditional psychology undergraduate programs accredited by the BPS can offer appropriate education and training for the next generation of academics as well as professional psychologists. Such a debate is beyond this chapter, but it is important to keep in mind that the majority of graduates will not become academic or professional psychologists. For this reason alone, study programs have a responsibility to pay more attention to developing the attributes within McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) concept of more psychologically literate citizens.

Learning To Be Psychologically Literate The second area in which we can look to enhance psychological literacy in undergraduate psychology education is by giving consideration to how students learn.

202


Many aspects of the student learning experience are relevant here, but in this section we focus on assessment, work experience, and international study. The application of knowledge to new situations is fundamental to problem solving, a fundamental attribute of psychological literacy. Designing a variety of assessment tasks (Sternberg, 2004) that give students the opportunity to apply, rather than just discuss, what they have learned enables students to become more confident in applying their learning. The independent research project and third-year electives, where smaller cohort sizes encourage more individual discussion and attention, provide additional opportunities. Providing students with opportunities for work experience either in the workplace or in community settings (such as types of “service learning”) are additional ways in which students can be encouraged to develop their psychological literacy in socially responsible ways. In a limited number of universities compulsory work experience occurs during the second year. This is an opportunity for students to reflect on the theories of psychology they have learned (e.g., teamwork, leadership, assessments linked to recruitment, motivation and staff development, stressors in the workplace) and apply these to their work-related experiences. Reddy and Moores’ (2006) study of the value of a psychology placement year concluded that students achieve significantly better final-year marks and are rated significantly higher by their supervisors on a number of attributes following a 1-year work placement. The experience of studying abroad is also widely recognized as being beneficial to student learning, personal development, and career opportunities (Brown, Archer, & Barnes, 2008). Although many students travel to the United Kingdom to study psychology, few U.K. students choose to study psychology abroad as part of their studies. To some extent this can be explained by the following factors: the way in which students fund their studies (often by working part-time throughout their program); the perceived constraints by program directors of timetabling, meeting the requirements of BPS accreditation, and finding comparable courses; and possibly an insular approach within U.K. psychology education. There are initiatives to expand these opportunities, but these need broader support.

Conclusions In relation to many of the examples and suggestions within this chapter, a key question arises: How critical are we willing to encourage students to be? We encourage critiques of methodologies and the selection of data used to provide evidence, but do we also encourage students, for example, to investigate the funding of some research by companies with vested interests? In promoting critical thinking and questioning, we need to be willing to engage with unintended consequences of the promotion of independent thinking, such as students’ resistance to some subject matter, and their challenging of concepts of academic authority. We believe the concept of psychological literacy to be useful in defining a broad set of skills underpinning psychology education across the world. The broader


203

construct of the psychologically literate citizen is more problematic, given the contested nature of citizenship. Nonetheless, there are many ways in which undergraduate psychology education could take more responsibility for ensuring that its graduates have a better understanding of the contested epistemology of psychology, the ability of psychology to address current global issues, and the importance of taking a critical approach in problem solving. Furthermore, those who apply psychological literacy to civic engagement may use their knowledge to be part of solutions to community, local, regional, and national issues, through gathering and using research evidence as the basis for interventions. Psychological literacy could equip citizens with skills of written and spoken engagement, competent use of technology, and the abilities to work cooperatively with others in small or larger groups. All of the suggestions are predicated on working together with colleagues in an enlightened way. Students and faculty may experience difficulties when they encounter less flexible thinkers who assert their authority in more absolute terms. The promotion of collaborative and more open-ended approaches, with consideration of alternative viewpoints, becomes important in the leadership of academic teams, and may conflict with research-driven agendas. There are thus challenges for more central university support for such initiatives, built upon sound information sharing and fundamental consideration of the principles underpinning a university education.

References American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, D. C.: Author. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/ psymajor_guideline.pdf. Arthur, J., & Bohlin K. E. (Eds.) (2009). Citizenship and higher education: the role of universities in communities and society. London: Routledge. Banyard, P., Davies, M. N. O., Norman, C., & Winder, B. (Eds.) (2010). Essential psychology: a concise introduction. London: Sage. Barker, S. (2007). Vital notes for nurses: psychology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Basset, T., Campbell, P., & Anderson, J. (2006) Service user/survivor involvement in mental health education and training: overcoming the barriers, Social Work Education, 25(4), 393–402. BeSST (2010). A core curriculum for psychology in undergraduate medical education. Newcastle: Higher Education Academy Psychology Network & Subject Centre for Medicine, Dentistry & Veterinary Medicine. Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage. Brown, R., Archer, W., & Barnes, J. (2008). Global horizons and the role of employers. London: Council for Industry and Higher Education. Browne, K. (2009). The risk of harm to young children in institutional care. London: Save the Children UK. Child, D. (2007). Psychology and the teacher. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.

204


Clark, C., & Dugdale, G. (2008). Literacy changes lives: the role of literacy in offending behaviour. London: National Literacy Trust. Davey, G. (Ed.) (2008). Complete psychology (2nd edn). Abingdon, UK: Hodder Education. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: Call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Dunn, D. S., & McCarthy, M. A. (2010). The capstone course in psychology as liberal education opportunity. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill, IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 155–170). New York: Oxford University Press. Faulks, K. (2000). Citizenship. London: Routledge. Fleming, M. (2006): The use and mis-use of competence frameworks and statements with particular attention to describing achievements in literature. Paper presented at the Conference organised by the Council of Europe and Jagiellonian University “Towards a Common European Framework of Reference for Languages of School Education?” Kraków, Poland, April 27–29, 2006. Hacking, I. (1990). The taming of chance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 69–97. Layard, R., Clark, D., Bell, S., Knapp, M., Meacher, B., Priebe, S., Turnberg, L., Thornicroft, G., & Wright, B. (2006). The depression report; a new deal for depression and anxiety disorders. The Centre for Economic Performance’s Mental Health Policy Group, LSE. Accessed from: http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp0829.pdf. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371–378. Pattie, C., Seyd, P., & Whiteley, P. (2004). Citizenship in Britain: values, participation and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Quality Assurance Agency (2010). Honours degree benchmark statements. Gloucester. Accessed from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/benchmark/honours/ default.asp. Reddy, P., & Moores, E. (2006). Measuring the benefits of a psychology placement year. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(5), 551–567. Rose, N. (2005). The powers of freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Scott, B. A., & Koger, S. M. (2006). Teaching psychology for sustainability: a manual of resources. Office of Teaching Resources in Psychology. Electronic publication at www. teachgreenpsych.com. Sternberg, R. J. (2004). The CAPS model: assessing psychology performance using the theory of successful intelligence. In D. S. Dunn, C. M. Mehrotra, & J. S. Halonen (Eds.), Measuring up: education assessment challenges and practices for psychology (pp. 111–124). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.


205

The Home Office (2007). Life in the United Kingdom: A journey to citizenship (2nd ed.). London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Trapp, A., & Upton, D. (2010). Individual differences: psychology in the European Community. In D. Upton & A. Trapp (eds.), Teaching psychology in higher education (pp. 1–22). Chichester: BPS Blackwell. University of Aberdeen (2010). http://www.abdn.ac.uk/about/curriculum-reform.php. University of Wolverhampton (2010). http://www.wlv.ac.uk/default.aspx?page=22433. Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: why more equal societies almost always do better. London: Allen Lane (Penguin).

15 Psychological Literacy Goals in Psychology Teaching in Russian Education Victor Karandashev

I

n this chapter I start with a brief historical overview of psychology undergraduate education in Russia, comparing the professionally oriented undergraduate programs typical for Russia, as well as for many European and South American countries, with the liberal arts education tradition typical for the United Kingdom, Australia, and North America. The role of psychological literacy as a desired outcome of psychology courses is discussed in that context. Several popular examples of assignments and exercises used by many Russian instructors for development of psychological literacy are described. Transformation of Russian undergraduate education from the 5-year specialist degree to the 4-year bachelor degree is planned (Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, 2005) under the Bologna European reforms in higher education (Lunt, 2005). This reform may change the goals and outcomes of undergraduate psychology. The Russian Ministry of Education has approved new standards for the bachelor degree that are in operation from 2010 forward. How do such standards comply with the goals of psychological literacy? I will explore this question in the pages that follow.

Concepts of Psychological Literacy and Psychological Culture Since the early 1900s, psychology at Russian universities was taught with an emphasis on empirical research and experimental design. Teaching psychology at universities was traditionally intertwined with experience in research and aimed to prepare students for careers in academia (Karandashev, 2005, 2006). Higher psychology education was strongly oriented to academic and, later, professional education rather than to psychological literacy. Many professors, however, implicitly considered educating for psychological literacy as an important goal of teaching psychology, especially for students who did not major in psychology. Teaching psychology for psychological literacy occurred mostly in high school education. This tradition can be traced back to the early stages of teaching

Psychological Literacy Goals in Psychology Teaching in Russian Education

207

psychology in Russia (Karandashev, 2000). When in 1905 psychology was included in the high school curriculum, the educational goal of the teaching of psychology had been declared to foster the “clear understanding of psychic phenomena by students” (Karandashev, 2000, p. 415). The practical goal of psychology teaching was “to teach the skills of attentive looking at psychic phenomena and conscious attitude in reading” (Karandashev, 2000, p. 415). In short, self-examination and improved study skills were the goals. Since the early 1900s psychological literacy was a consistent goal in the teaching of psychology in high schools for most of the 20th century when psychology was taught (with some breaks in the timeline; Karandashev, 2000). From the late 1980s forward, besides “psychological literacy” a student’s personal growth was stressed as a goal for the teaching of psychology. The concept of psychological literacy, conceived as mastery of psychology knowledge and skills, was replaced by the term “individual psychological culture of behavior,” which is a more complex concept. Psychological literacy was considered only as a basis for individual psychological culture of behavior and personal psychological growth. A person with psychological literacy knows and understands psychological aspects of a problem, but one with psychological culture can really and effectively use that knowledge to solve the problem. Russian authors include the various components in the structure of individual psychological culture: (1) psychological literacy, (2) culture of behavior and communication competency, (3) value orientations of an individual, (4) self-understanding and realistic self-evaluation, (5) ability for psychological self-regulation, (6) culture of thinking and creativity (Kolmogorova, 1997, 1998, 1999; Kolmogorova & Kashirsky, 1998; Motkov, 1999; Obozov, 1986). Teaching psychology contributes significantly to the fostering of such individual psychological culture. Kolmogorova (1998) suggested distinguishing between general psychological culture and professional psychological culture. There is much similarity in the concepts of individual psychological culture of behavior as defined by Russian authors (see above) and psychological literÂ� acy as defined by McGovern and colleagues (2010, p. 11). The concept of psyÂ� choloÂ�gical literacy was conceived by Russian authors literally as knowing and understanding of psychological knowledge, so extension to values, behavioral, communicative, self-cognition, self-regulation, and thinking aspects occurred in the Russian definition of individual psychological culture. In contrast, McGovern and colleagues (2010, p. 11) considered the concept of psychological literacy as being much broader and more complex than the literal meaning of the literacy term itself (cf. Cranney & Dunn, Chapter 1 in this volume). Essentially, therefore, there is much overlap between the concepts of individual psychological culture and psychological literacy. Their interpretation may depend on a reader’s connotation of the words as well as on additional definitions that authors provide. Translations from one language to another may lead to confusion. The concept of psychological competency, instead of psychological literacy or individual psychological culture, might be the term more suitable for the outcome of psychology teaching.

208


Undergraduate Psychology in the Traditions of Liberal Arts Education and Professional Higher Education: Different Purposes of Psychological Literacy as a Desired Outcome The idea of educating for psychological literacy as a goal and outcome of teaching psychology at universities relates to the liberal arts education tradition, typical for the United Kingdom and North America (Halpern, 2010). The undergraduate programs are intended to give students a general education, while preparation of students for an independent academic or professional career is postponed until the graduate program. Liberal arts education is different from the professional education/training tradition typical for many countries in Europe and South America. In the latter programs education is intertwined with career preparation as a core goal. There are essential differences in these two types of undergraduate programs. 1. The liberal arts undergraduate program is intended to provide students with a higher general and academic education with a broad array of knowledge and skills that may be helpful for a variety of work activities and prepare students for various further pathways for professional development after their graduation. The major in psychology is typically 3 to 4 years in duration, which allows much freedom for students to take a variety of courses from different areas of knowledge with a major in one academic area and a minor in another. Students take the different courses relatively independently of each other. Graduates receive a bachelor degree in arts or science. The liberal arts undergraduate program is essentially an extension of high school (with considerable breadth and selective depth) because it provides an education, not training in a profession. 2. The professional undergraduate program is intended to train students for their professional career; it combines general academic education and specific professional training goals. Specialist undergraduate degree programs combine the objectives of bachelor and master degrees (of the aforementioned Bologna model, for example) in one program of longer duration (5 to 6 years). Each semester, cohorts of the same students have to study certain courses, corresponding to their professional specialization, and general education courses (sometimes including psychology as a general education or professional discipline). The titles and contents of the courses are similar to those offered in the bachelor of arts or science degree, but they have to be taken by students in a certain sequence in accord with the curriculum officially affirmed by a university. A specialist program in psychology is a degree in its own right. The professional undergraduate program essentially embraces both an education and professional training.


209

In defining the role of psychology teaching, in the first case, it is worthwhile to talk about general psychological literacy of students (of any major), and in the second case, about general psychological literacy of students of non–humanrelated professions (physics, geology, astronomy, and the like) and about professional psychological literacy of students of human-related professions (teachers, doctors, lawyers, managers, psychologists, and the like). General psychological literacy refers to the ability to use psychological knowledge in a broad context of personal and interpersonal life. Professional psychological literacy refers to the ability to use psychological knowledge in professional activities. For the past several decades undergraduate education was considered in Russia (as well as in many European and South American countries) as professional, intended to prepare students as specialists in certain professional areas (e.g., preschool development, school teaching, medicine, the law, management) at the higher education level. Ideas of a broad grounding in liberal arts education were not in the core of undergraduate programs in Russia. Nevertheless, one third of the courses students were required to take were in the area of general education, and psychology (along with pedagogy) often counted as a part of general education. Professors of psychology considered psychological literacy as an important goal and outcome of teaching psychology, especially when they taught introductory/general psychology to students who were not in the specialist psychology programs. The goal of educating psychologically literate students has been more typical for such psychology courses since many other courses, such as developmental and educational psychology, abnormal and clinical psychology, and forensic psychology, were more oriented to professional education/training (of teachers, psychologists, medical doctors, lawyers, managers, and the like). Undergraduate psychology courses are currently taught both within 4-year bachelor programs and 5-year specialist programs for students of different fields (majors), including not only psychology, but also education, sociology, social work, economics, law, medicine, and others. Specialist programs are designed to allow students to pursue both educational and professional training goals, while bachelor programs aim only at educational goals. Psychology degree programs include many required psychology courses covering basic, applied, and methodological topics. Education, sociology, social work, economics, law, and medicine degree programs usually have two to five psychology courses, including general psychology and appropriate applied psychology topics for the respective fields. Developmental and educational psychology (in the case of education degrees), social psychology (in the case of society-related and management programs), organizational and work psychology (in the case of economics and management fields), forensic and justice psychology (in the case of law programs), or clinical and health psychology (in the case of medicine) are offered. Many other undergraduate programs contain psychology only as an introductory course (Karandashev, 2006). Undergraduate psychology degree programs are mostly general in nature, but specialization is possible in some programs in Russia. Areas of specialization currently available include personality, social, political, industrial/organizational, management, forensic, psychophysiology, deviation and developmental retardation,

210


developmental, educational, counseling, social work, and sports psychology. Within each of these specialization areas, faculty offer specific courses to supply deeper knowledge and skills for students in the chosen field of interest. Psychology courses account for about two thirds of the courses in the psychology degree curriculum at the undergraduate level. Another third consists of general education courses typical for all undergraduate education. These include foreign language, physical training, history of Russia, cultural studies, political science, law, pedagogy, Russian language, sociology, philosophy, economics, mathematics, information technology, natural sciences, anthropology, anatomy of the nervous system, physiology of the nervous system, and physiology of higher nervous activity and sensory systems (Karandashev, 2006).

Psychological Literacy Among the Goals of Undergraduate Psychology in Russia The psychology literacy principle of “having a well-defined vocabulary and basic knowledge of the critical subject matter of psychology” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 11) was always a priority in undergraduate Russian psychology. Some instructors advocated avoiding burdening students with the sophisticated (“foreign”) language of psychological science and proposed using simpler words in general psychology courses. However, most professors deemed the growth of scientific psychology vocabulary as an important outcome for undergraduate psychology education and encouraged students to master the new terms and concepts (Petrovsky, 1986). This was in accord with the ideas of Vygotsky, who considered the development of language and thought as intertwined processes (Vygotsky, 1986). According to his influential theory, language is a tool for development of thought. The implications of the development of a well-defined vocabulary are evident: learning new terms and concepts enriches students’ minds and develops more sophisticated ways of thinking. This goal became especially apparent in recent years when numerous psychology dictionaries were published as separate books or appendices to textbooks or as websites. The problem nevertheless remains: How do we encourage students to meaningfully understand and master the vocabulary, not just flashing the flashcards with word definitions? Teaching psychology in Russian undergraduate programs is in accord with understanding psychological literacy as “being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behavior and mental processes” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 11). To achieve this goal psychology professors give students opportunities to engage in psychological analysis of cognitive processes, behavior, and personality of others and themselves. Practical learning activities have been required within psychology classes in many undergraduate education programs in Russia since the 1970s. According to the curriculum a psychology course contains lecture as well as seminar or laboratory portions. Incorporation of lectures, seminars, and labs in psychology class is not optional for psychology professors, but rather mandated by the curriculum.


211

Lecture sessions are given to 50 to 100 students; seminars are conducted by a professor or assistant professor in groups of 25 to 30 students, laboratory sessions in subgroups of 12 to 15 students. Experiments are the typical form of activity in the labs. Students study sensory and perceptive processes, associations, memory, thinking, spatial cognition, attention, and emotions. They administer experimental or testing procedures to a classmate as a subject, collecting empirical data. The roles of experimenter and subject are assigned between two partners; they subsequently switch those roles. In this way they learn practically (at first hand) their perception, attention, memory, thinking, personality, social cognition, and individual differences. An example of such a class exercise is the laboratory study of attention stability: “Entangled lines.” The student-subject is requested to trace 25 lines (having corresponding numbers) entangled to each other. Every line starts from the left side of a rectangle figure to the right side. The student-experimenter investigates (1) the speed and correctness of tracing the lines, (2) if the subject’s attitude to the speed or correctness of tracing is prevalent, (3) how confident the subject was, and (4) difficulties and ways of their coping. Another example of a practical lab assignment is a mirror-drawing task. The student-subject is asked to trace with a pencil the drawn contour of a simple figure (like a five-angle star) using a special device that requires the student to look through the mirror, but not directly at the contour (mirror-drawing). This lab exercise is an imitation of the inverted vision experiment. The lab is intended to demonstrate the process of development of new spatial skills—drawing in the inverted condition. Several practicum texts with collections of such lab tasks have been published since the 1970s (e.g., Berkhin & Spitchak, 1972; Krylov, 1987; Leontiev & Gippenreyter, 1972; Platonov, 1980; Scherbakov, 1979). The self-cognition and self-understanding assignments play a role in enhancing psychological literacy. Many students enjoy learning something about their own behavior, memory, thinking, and personality. Other assignments pursuing this goal are (a) administration of surveys, personality questionnaires, or inventories, then (b) scoring and (c) interpreting their own results. These assignments give students an opportunity to apply psychological knowledge to self-analysis of their personality. The professor administers these assignments to a group of students and then students score and interpret their own results. Such procedures provide confidentiality of personally sensitive information. The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975, 1991) and Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966) are two popular examples of assignments that many psychology professors use in the laboratory portion of the general psychology course. Each of them is short enough and fits well into one class session: students have enough time to answer the questionnaire, score it, and interpret the results in terms of corresponding theory. Keeping personal scores confidential, the instructor guides the discussion of possible interpretation, implications, and behavioral consequences. Hans and Sybil Eysenck designed the EPQ to assess the personality traits of a person. In this assignment students learn about their extroversion–introversion

212


and neuroticism–stability dimensions of personality. Besides these two dimensions, students find it interesting to learn how they are related to the four Hippocrates–Galen temperaments (i.e., melancholic, choleric, phlegmatic, and sanguine). In Eysenck’s system, the melancholic, choleric, phlegmatic, and sanguine temperaments result from different combinations of the superfactors Extraversion (E) and Neuroticism (N) that correspond to four quadrants of temperament. It is important to mention that there are no sharp borderlines between these temperaments, and instructors typically comment on these by showing students Eysenck’s circle. Another popular exercise for self-cognition in the general psychology class is Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966). The class typically starts with a rather broad introduction to the topic (without giving too many details about theoretical constructs). Students then answer the questionnaire, score it, and interpret the data. They learn how internal or external their locus of control is, and what psychological and behavioral consequences this has. They learn, too, that people with internal locus of control feel life outcomes are under personal control, and use more problem-focused coping strategies. On the other hand, people with external locus of control feel that luck, chance, and powerful others control their behavior. Based on this exercise, students better understand their life perspective and the behavior of others. Since the 1980s the humanistic school of psychology followed Maslow’s (1968, 1970) methodological ideas and the client-centered psychotherapy of Rogers (1951, 1961, 1980); consequently, student-centered learning became popular in Russian psychology. As a result, many instructors emphasize such concepts as adequate understanding of self, appreciation and acceptance of others, and the development of the ability to make an informed decision. Another theory with some practical application for psychological literacy came to Russian undergraduate psychology classes in the 1990s, with the translation of a new model of psychoanalysis, the Transactional Analysis of Berne (Берн, 1992; Berne, 1964, 1972). Berne stated that games are the building blocks of life scripts. The roles people play in those games are interchangeable. He postulated three basic ego states—Parent, Adult, and Child—each with an important function, and introduced possible additional ego states by subdividing each of the three. For example, the Child had three options: Adapted Child, Little Professor, and Natural Child. Role-playing games (accepting “parent,” “adult,” and “child” positions) appeared to explain much in our everyday interpersonal communication, and so attracted the attention of instructors and students in classroom activities. Thus, the psychological literacy principle of “being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behavior and mental processes” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 11) adopted a variety of cognitive, personality, humanistic, and psychoanalytical flavors in application to undergraduate psychology classes. Despite the empirical approach in labs, theoretical and descriptive orientations (rather than presentation of empirical results) are still prominent in psychology textbooks. Most books have a chapter on research methods, but the process of


213

psychological inquiry is not presented extensively in other chapters. Such textbook design leads to the separation of the psychology research methods from psychology knowledge in students’ minds. More coverage of how scientific psychology results were obtained would be helpful for developing critical thinking as a component of psychological literacy, despite the fact that students like the more practical aspects of psychology knowledge, rather than evaluation of such knowledge. Thus, I believe that “valuing the intellectual challenges required to use scientific thinking and the disciplined analysis of information to evaluate alternative courses of action” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 11) is among the goals not well accomplished in general psychology courses. Perhaps psychology instructors should pay more attention to the development of students’ skills and habits of critical thinking about statements regarding human behavior, examining the validity and evidence of such statements.

Recent Developments and New Perspectives in Undergraduate Psychology Education in Russia Since the early 1990s there has been increasing interest in psychology education in Russia. More than 100 new psychology undergraduate programs were established in the last decade of the 20th century. During the 1990s, psychology courses gradually extended, being incorporated in the curriculum of undergraduate programs in many other fields (Karandashev, 2006). In the 1990s the growth of undergraduate psychology as well as undergraduate programs in other areas of knowledge was radical, although their quality and content sometimes were under question. The Russian Ministry of Education considered it necessary to develop nationwide standards for undergraduate education. Such standards of the first “generation” were developed and approved by the Ministry in 1995, then the second “generation” in 2000. These standards defined stricter requirements regarding the curriculum and the content of the courses. Universities have to follow those when undergraduate psychology programs are established and when they confirm their accreditation. In recent years the necessity for a third generation of higher education standards was considered. This coincided with the decision of the Russian government to join the Bologna reforms in higher education in Europe, so the 4-year baccalaureate (bachelor degree) in psychology is now replacing the 5-year specialist undergraduate degree program. Thus, the goals and expected outcomes of undergraduate psychology may change. Standards for the bachelor degree in psychology were established and affirmed by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia in December 2009 (2009). According to that document the bachelor of psychology undergraduate program is still considered as higher professional education and prepares students for the following professional activities: psychology practice, research, teaching psychology, and organization and management. It is expected that graduates will have

214


two types of competencies as desired outcomes of undergraduate psychology program: general cultural outcomes and professional outcomes. Among the general cultural competencies applicable to the concept of psychological literacy are: • Understanding the role of humanistic values for maintaining and developing modern civilization, improving and developing society based on principles of humanism, freedom, and democracy • Understanding the modern scientific theories of the world, the main achievements of natural and social sciences • Mastery of scientific thinking, analysis, synthesis, and generalization of scientific facts and theoretical concepts • Use of theoretical and experimental research, methods of mathematical statistics and modeling, statistical packages for data analysis • Skills for self-analysis and self-regulation of own activity and psychic states • Understanding personality characteristics, emotions of others, ability to establish confidential contact and dialogue, convince and support people • Ability to make organizational and management decisions in nonstandard situations • Ability to undertake information searches and literature reviews necessary for professional tasks, writing scientific articles, reports, etc. • Computer user skills for management of information • Using modern information and Internet technologies in the area of professional expertise • Use of foreign language skills in professional activity and communication • Skills for maintaining a healthy way of life and use of physical training and exercises to secure full social and professional activity. Many professional competencies are applicable for the future professional activities of psychology graduates: practice, research, teaching, and organization and management activity. In practice: • Implementation of standard programs of prevention in social and personal deviations as well as prevention of professional risks • Selection and application of psychodiagnostic methods, and following statistical analysis and interpretation • Description of structure of professional activity and psychological profile of a professional • Implementation of standard and basic procedures of psychological help using traditional methods • Recognizing the features of psychological functioning of an individual, taking into consideration developmental aspects, risk factors, gender, ethnicity, profession, and other social roles


215

• Psychological diagnostics of cognitive, emotional, motivation and regulation functions, aptitudes, character, temperament, psychological states, personality traits as normal and abnormal, for the purposes of harmonization of psychological functioning of a person • Prognosis of all mentioned in the previous point. In research: • • • •

Application of knowledge of psychological science Understanding of research tasks Participation in psychological research Conducting standard applied research

In teaching: • Teaching of psychology as a general educational discipline • Development of teaching materials • Preparation for laboratory classes, participation in their administration • Implementation of standard helping, rehabilitation, and teaching programs • Dissemination of knowledge to enhance psychological culture of the population in the community and society. In organization and management: • Analysis of interaction in working groups • Participation in selection processes for the candidates for a certain position • Optimization of psychological climate and processes of production • Psychological support of personal growth of workers and maintenance of health of individuals and groups. Some of the desired outcomes listed above can be considered not only as part of general psychological literacy, but also as part of professional psychological literacy, suitable to a wide array of psychological and non-psychological practice and research. The expertise of graduates in psychology is very broad, and makes their knowledge and skills applicable in many fields of psychology and beyond. This fits with the meaning of psychological literacy as “applying psychological principles to personal, social, and organizational issues in work, relationships, and the broader community” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 11). In the standards of 2000 for specialist and bachelor degrees in professional education (other than psychology specialization), psychology courses have been considered as professional disciplines (educational psychology [for teachers],

216


medical psychology [for doctors], legal psychology [for lawyers] and so on), or as a general education discipline (general psychology, for many others not related to human factors). Thus, in the first case psychology courses are intended for professional psychological literacy, and in the second case for general psycholoÂ� gical literacy. However, in the latter case psychology and pedagogy are taught as one course within one semester, so the time devoted to psychology content is limited. However, according to standards established and affirmed by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia in December 2009, neither psychology nor pedagogy was included in the standards as humanities or social sciences courses. This can be interpreted to mean that the role of psychology as a general education course declined with the third generation of standards in 2010.

Challenging Questions for the Future There are some challenging questions regarding the future of psychological literacy, including: 1. How strictly should we define psychological literacy? How are concepts such as psychological literacy, psychological competence, and personal psychological culture related to each other? Which one is most suitable for the desired outcome of undergraduate psychology teaching? I admit that psychological competence better suits for this purpose. 2. Are all meanings of psychological literacy listed by McGovern and colleagues (2010) really psychological? Several of those may be considered as broader than just psychological—for example, “acting ethically”; “being competent in using and evaluating information and technology”; and “communicating effectively in different modes and with many different audiences.” Other disciplines contribute to their implementation. 3. Should we extend the concept of psychological literacy and distinguish between general psychological literacy and professional psychology literacy?

Conclusions Psychological competency or individual psychological culture of behavior, the concepts widely used by Russian scholars, may be considered as alternatives to the concept of psychological literacy as the desired outcome for psychology undergraduate education. They suggest a broader and deeper understanding of psychology’s teaching mission. Extensive employment of seminars and labs helps to better prepare students for practical use of psychology knowledge. Such forms of teaching are mandated by


217

the curriculum in Russia, and instructors have developed many interesting and useful labs, practical activities, and exercises. Distinguishing between general and professional psychological literacy is important because psychology teaching should prepare students to use their psychology knowledge, skills, and values in their work activity as well as in everyday personal and interpersonal life, to shape their lives, professions, and societies. Such extension would allow embracing various world educational philosophies and systems aimed at liberal arts or sciences education, professional training, or both.

References Berkhin, N. B., & Spitchak, S. F. (Eds.) (1972). Практические занятия по психологии [Practical activities on psychology]/Сост. Н.Б. Берхин и С.Ф. Спичак; Под ред. А.В. Петровского.–Москва.: Просвещение. Берн Э. (1992). Игры, в которые играют люди : психология человеческих взаимоотношений; Люди, которые играют в игры : психология человеческой судьбы/пер. с английского А.В.Ярхо, Л.Г.Ионин; общ. ред. М.С. Мацковского. – Санкт-Петербург: Лениздат. Berne, E. (1964). Games people play: the psychology of human relationships. New York: Grove Press. Berne, E. (1972). What do you say after you say hello? The psychology of human destiny. New York: Grove Press. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1991). Eysenck Personality Questionnaire— Revised (EPQ-R). London: Hodder & Stoughton. Halpern, D. F. (Ed.) (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Karandashev, V. (2000). Psychology teaching in Russian schools: current tendencies. Abstracts of the XXVII International Congress of Psychology, Stockholm, Sweden, July 23–28, 2000. International Journal of Psychology, p. 415. Karandashev, V. (2005). Методика преподавания психологии: Учебное пособие [Theory and methods of teaching psychology: guide for instructors in universities, colleges, and high schools]. St. Petersburg: Peter Press. Karandashev, V. (2006). Teaching of undergraduate psychology in Russia. International Practices in the Teaching of Psychology: Special Issue of International Journal of Psychology, 41, 58–64. Kolmogorova, L. S. (1997). Элементы психологической грамотности [Elements of psychological literacy]. Барнаул. Kolmogorova, L. S. (1998). Становление психологической культуры личности как ориентир современного образования [Formation of psychological culture of personality as orientation of modern education]. Педагог, no. 3. Kolmogorova, L. S. (1999). Генезис и диагностика психологической культуры младших школьников [Development and diagnostics of psychological culture of elementary school students]. Барнаул.

218


Kolmogorova, L. S., & Kashirsky, D. V. (1998). Сравнительное изучение элементов психологической культуры студентов педвуза и старшеклассников [CompaÂ� rative study of elements of psychological culture of students of pedagogical university and high school students]. Педагог, 6, 100–108. Krylov, A. A. (Ed.) (1987). Практикум по общей и экспериментальной психологии: Учеб. пособие [Practicum on general and experimental psychology: textbook]/В. Д. Балин, В.К. Гайда, В.А. Ганзен и др.; Под общ. ред. А.А. Крылова.–Ленинград.: Изд-во Ленингр. ун-та. Leontiev, A. N., & Gippenreyter, Y. B. (Eds.) (1972). Практикум по психологии [Practicum on psychology]/Под ред. А.Н. Леонтьева, Ю.Б. Гиппенрейтер.– Москва.: Изд-во Моск. ун-та. Lunt, I. (2005). The impact of the “Bologna Process” on the development of a European Qualification in Psychology. European Psychologist, 10, 86–92. Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being (2d ed.). New York: Van Nostrand. Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality (rev. ed.). New York: Harper & Row. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E., Jr., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Ministry of Education and Science of Russia (2005). О реализации положений Болонской декларации в системе высшего профессионального образования Российской Федерации. Решение коллегии Минобрнауки России [On implementation of Bologna declaration in higher professional education of Russian Federation: Decree of the collegium of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia]. Официальные документы в образовании, 7, 85–87. Ministry of Education and Science of Russia (2009). Федеральный государственный образовательный стандарт высшего профессионального образования по направлению подготовки 030300 Психология (квалификация (степень) «бакалавр»). Утвержден приказом Министерства образования и науки Российской Федерации от 21 декабря 2009г., № 759. [National educational standard of higher professional education for psychology qualification (degree) of Bachelor]. М: 2010. Retrieved from Учебно-методическое объединение по классическому университетскому образованию. Утвержденные Федеральные Государственные Образовательные Стандарты (ФГОС). http://www.umo.msu. ru/index.php?file_name=STATIC/fgos.html. Motkov, O. I. (1999). Психологическая культура личности [Psychological culture of a personality]. Школьный психолог, 15, 8–9. Retrieved from http://psychology. rsuh.ru/motarticle9.htm Obozov, N. N. (1986). Психологическая культура взаимных отношений [Psychological culture of interpersonal relations]. Ленинград. Petrovsky, A. V. (Ed.) (1986). Общая психология: Учеб. для студентов пединститутов [General Psychology: Textbook for students of pedagogical specialties]/Под ред. А.В. Петровского. 3-е изд. - Москва: Просвещение. Platonov, K. K. (1980). Психологический практикум: учеб. пособие для индустрÂ� иально-педагогических техникумов [Psychological practicum: textbook for students of industrial-pedagogical colleges]. Москва: Высш. школа.


219

Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy: its current practice, implications and theory. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: a therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 33, 300–303. Scherbakov, A. I. (Ed.) (1979). Практикум по общей психологии [Practicum on general psychology]/В.В. Богословский, Т.И. Бочкарева, А.И. Великородн; Под ред. А.И. Щербакова.–Москва: Просвещение. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Boston: MIT Press.

16 Sustainability and the Psychologically Literate Citizen A New Zealand Perspective N i k i H a r r é , T a c i a n o L . M i l f o nt , W i ll i a m H e lt o n , a n d An d r e a M e a d

In his 1971 book Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky (1971, p. 191) wrote: We are in the age of pollution, progressively burying ourselves in our waste. We announce that our water is contaminated by our own excrement, insecticides, and detergents, and then do nothing. Even a half-witted people, if sane, would long since have done the simple and obvious—ban all detergents, develop new non-polluting insecticides, and immediately build waste-disposal units. Apparently we would rather be corpses in clean shirts. Unfortunately, there is little evidence that our priorities have changed since 1971. We can now add to Alinsky’s (1971) list of environmental problems many others, including the degradation of our fisheries, increases in concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, changes to regional climate patterns, and increases in natural hazards and pests. In fact, it has been estimated that 60 percent of the ecosystem services that support life on Earth are being degraded or used unsustainably (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). Where does psychology fit into this? As Alinsky implied, while the problems are manifest in the physical world, they are the result of maladaptive human behavior and social systems. More specifically, it is as if our collective behavior has failed to keep up with our collective understanding of the problems and how to solve them. These human puzzles are at the core of psychology, and several publications in our discipline have argued for psychological initiatives that boldly lead the way forward (see, e.g., Corral-Verdugo, García-Cadena, & Frías-Arment, 2010; Gifford, 2008; Schmuck & Schultz, 2002; Vlek & Steg, 2007). In this chapter, we argue for the inclusion of sustainability within teaching programs in psychology, and show how neatly this fits with the concept of the

Sustainability and the Psychologically Literate Citizen

221

psychologically literate citizen. We then focus on the New Zealand context and give a brief review of sustainability-related teaching in the nation’s psychology departments. The core of our chapter is four case studies: a first-year social dilemmas laboratory, a third-year laboratory that explores students’ views on animal cognition and the ethics of our farming and conservation practices, a fourth yearseminar-based course on environmental psychology, and an action research program on creating a sustainable school that includes research projects for fourth-year students.

Why Include Sustainability in Teaching for the Psychologically Literate Citizen? Throughout their chapter on the psychologically literate citizen, McGovern and colleagues (2010) emphasize three elements that are particularly relevant to our discussion. One of these is learning to think critically about human functioning through the application of scientific methods. Psychologically literate citizens question the prevailing wisdom about how people think, feel, and behave, seek evidence to assess the validity of particular perspectives, and are cautious about their judgments. The second involves a willingness to engage with “human-Â�focused values” (p. 25). Psychology, as they describe it, and we would agree, is not merely a science in which the world is revealed; it is also an ethical and self-Â�reflective process in which the relevance of those revelations for personal and collective well-being is considered. The third aspect involves applying the insights gained to the real world. McGovern and colleagues point out that “Psychologists must educate students who can act as stewards to help ensure the survival of the planet and to actively contribute to the betterment of all peoples” (p. 25). The psychologically literate are not “citizens” in the full sense of the word unless they contribute to the public realm and can communicate with a variety of audiences. Although many topics can help nurture these ideals, sustainability is particularly well placed. We have already mentioned the disconnection between human knowledge of environmental degradation and the human behavior that perpetuates it. This disconnection is deeply perplexing, and yet there are many empirical studies and theories in psychology that can help us understand why it exists. For example, studies on group identification show that people tend to pay more attention to the identity of the speaker than to the actual argument being raised (e.g., Kahan, 2010). This result implies that even the most robust scientific evidence for ecological change may not be persuasive if it is presented by someone who is not “one of us.” Other research has revealed cognitive biases in how people assess environmental risks (e.g., Milfont, 2010). Still more studies have revealed the power of situational cues in influencing people’s environmental behavior (e.g., Cialdini, 2003). In other words, the behavioral paradox that underlies the current ecological crisis is a powerful starting point for introducing students to the scientific study of psychology. All the case studies we discuss in the next section use psychological research to help train systematic, scientific thinking in our students.

222

T h e P s y c h ologically L ite r ate C itizen

Tackling the sustainability problem can help psychology students apply valuesbased thinking as well. Two of our case studies (which appear later in this chapter) are vivid illustrations of this goal. In the second part of Mead and Harré’s stage one social dilemmas laboratory, for example, students consider how to distribute resources, and to do so they must agree on a values-based framework (or fail to agree and then observe the consequences). Typically, they consider many issues, including fairness and the desirability of leaving resources for the future. Similarly, William Helton’s exercise on animal cognition systematically leads students through a process that requires them to articulate and discuss issues related to the ethics of eating animals, farming, and eradicating some species in order to protect others. By encompassing nonhuman as well as human nature, sustainability is rife with examples that challenge and broaden our students’ ability to articulate and discuss values. Finally, students’ theoretical learning about sustainability can translate beautifully into action. Given the breadth of the issue, students can be encouraged to undertake a personal action (such as reducing their energy use, as was done in a second-year class exercise at Victoria University of Wellington, described more fully in the next section), to work for organizational change (as will be demonstrated in our third and fourth case studies), or to advocate for political change. Given the fit between psychological literacy and sustainability, as well as the obvious contribution psychology can make to the sustainability problem, one may conclude that sustainability teaching must be rife in psychology departments all over the world. However, this does not appear to be the case. In an article calling for an integration of psychology and environmental sustainability, Koger and Scott (2007) observed that environmental issues are not prominent in psychology undergraduate programs. Furthermore, the potential of psychology to contribute to interdisciplinary approaches is not always recognized. For example, in David Orr’s (1992) outline of an ecological literacy curriculum, psychology was not directly mentioned. Koger and Scott (2007) suggested this may be due to the lack of a suitable subdiscipline in which to locate this topic, it having morphed almost beyond recognition from the environmental psychology of a few decades ago. They refer to “conservation psychology” as a possible unifying subdiscipline, and there is now a textbook with this title (see Clayton & Myers 2009). There are also a number of textbooks that show how the different branches of psychology can be applied to ecological issues (for a comprehensive list see www.teachinggreenpsych.com). Recently, too, chapters on sustainability have been added to some general psychology textbooks (e.g., Myers, 2010). To conclude this section, we suggest that the notion of the psychologically literate citizen provides a strong platform for integrating sustainability into psychology programs, and that those who are interested in teaching psychological literacy may care to consider how sustainability-related topics can encourage such literacy in our students. We also suggest that psychologically focused sustainability teaching has been underused to date.


223

Sustainability Teaching in New Zealand Psychology Departments Seven of New Zealand’s eight universities have psychology departments or schools. Psychology is popular with students. For example, at the University of Auckland there are approximately 1,200 students who take each of our introductory courses. In preparing this chapter we conducted an informal sustainability teaching audit within each department. This audit included a search of the courses advertised on the departments’ websites and contacting staff to find out if sustainability topics were included in the program. Three of the departments appeared to have no sustainability-related teaching (although we acknowledge our search process may have missed relevant material). At the University of Waikato, in Hamilton, sustainability is covered in two community psychology courses run by Ottilie Stolte that discuss the overlap between social and environmental concerns and how they both affect health. At the University of Canterbury, in Christchurch, William Helton teaches a full thirdyear course on environmental psychology; this is included as a case study in the next section. At the University of Auckland, as well as the first-year laboratory exercise and school sustainability action research project described in the next section, a further lecturer, Virginia Braun, incorporates discursive material on “clean green New Zealand” in a course on critical qualitative research. Victoria University, in Wellington, has the strongest history of sustainability teaching. For example, James Liu ran a “behaviour-change diary” exercise as part of a stage two course on social psychology and individual differences. Students took part in a program of environmental action with a team of fellow students sharing the same behavioral change goal (e.g., to reduce electricity consumption). Throughout the exercise, students recorded their activities in an online diary and created a final report describing their experience and success at changing their behavior. Students also voluntarily participated in research addressing environmental issues, which resulted in a fourth-year dissertation and a master’s thesis (see Davie, 2008; Miller, 2008). Another academic, John McClure, has a session devoted to sustainability issues in his stage three course on applied social psychology. Since joining this university in February 2008, Taciano L. Milfont has given several lectures on the psychology of environmental problems across the university, including in architecture, geography, and environmental sciences. This work has culminated in the development of a new fourth-year course in environmental psychology (discussed in the next section).

Case Studies of Sustainability-Related Teaching The first two case studies in this section are detailed descriptions of laboratory exercises. Although one is aimed at first-year university students and the other at third-year psychology majors, with slight adaptations they could also be used with high school students, in community groups, and in non-psychology

224


academic programs. We believe they are both powerful ways to challenge students’ views of how people think and make ethical judgments, as well as how to organize social life in order to maximize social justice and care for the environment. The remaining case studies concern higher-level students, a fourth-year course and fourth-year research dissertations. The course is, however, open to students from other disciplines and so suggests both how to expand psychological literacy beyond students who major in our discipline and the necessity of a multidisciplinary approach to achieve sustainability (or to tackle environmental problems). The fourth-year case studies also show how psychologically literate students can put their knowledge into practice, demonstrating the skills of an active citizen.

The Tragedy of the Commons: A First-Year Laboratory (Andrea Mead and Niki Harré) We run this laboratory with first-year psychology students at the University of Auckland. At the end of the exercise, students are required to write a report worth 10% of the course marks. It is described below, with observations from the 2010 class of just over 600 students working in 20 streams with eight instructors. The exercise is based on the “nuts game” (http://www.abacon.com/psychsite/tool_ social.html). The game involves a social dilemma, known as the tragedy of the commons (Hardin, 1968). The tragedy of the commons refers to the depletion of resources that can occur when each individual acts in his or her own interests by taking a little more than his or her “share,” a behavior that culminates in the destruction of the resource. Hardin applied the dilemma to the overgrazing of a village green; it can also help explain pollution, climate change, and, in New Zealand, overfishing. Seafood is the country’s fifth largest export product, with 4,41,000 tonnes exported in 2006/07. Recently, orange roughy numbers have became so severely depleted in the 4 million square kilometers of sea that makes up New Zealand’s exclusive fishing zone that the species is protected by the Ministry of Fisheries through low catch limits (see www.teara.govt.nz/en/fishingindustry). At the beginning of the laboratory, students are randomly divided into groups of five, plus one helper per group. They are then told the rules of the game they are about to play: 1. Each group will receive a box of 25 paperclips. 2. The aim of the game is to get as many paperclips as possible. 3. Every 30 seconds (= one round), the instructor will pause the game and the helper for each group will double the number of paperclips in the box. Unknown to the students, the game ends when all the paperclips are gone or after three rounds, whichever comes first. For the first game, students are instructed to be silent throughout. In our observations of this game, there were typically no paperclips left after the first round, so the game ended at that point.


225

Each participant then records the number of paperclips he or she acquired on a group record sheet. In most groups there was considerable variation in the number of clips acquired by individuals, with one person sometimes getting all the clips. Each participant also responds to two questions: the extent to which he or she “grabbed as many paper clips as possible” and “felt an obligation towards other group members” on a five-point Likert scale. The helper records the number of paperclips left in the box, should there be any. The game is then played a second time, with the same group. In this game, the rules are identical, but groups have 10 minutes to discuss their approach before the game begins. A wide variety of strategies emerged in the second game. In some groups, participants took turns to select their quota; others had leaders who allocated and dispensed the paper clips. Other groups chose not to remove paperclips and so watched their untouched resources double in size at the end of each round. For some the game ended with no one having acquired any clips. Most surprising were the groups who raided the resources of neighboring groups. As the rounds progressed, strategies sometimes changed and some groups reverted from an ordered approach to a free-for-all. At the end of the game, participants again record the number of clips they had acquired, the extent to which they “grabbed as many paper clips as possible” and “felt an obligation towards other group members,” and the helpers recorded the number of paperclips left in the box. Two things were immediately notable: the game lasted more than one round for most groups, as the paperclips had not all been taken in round one, and there were usually paperclips remaining at the end. The class then analyzes the data. One variable they examine is the range of paperclips acquired by group members in each game. Observations showed that while there was variation between groups, there was usually a more equitable distribution in game two than in game one. A paired samples t-test is conducted to examine differences in ratings of grabbing paperclips versus obligation to the group, and in almost all cases this showed significantly higher ratings for grabbing in game one and obligation to others in game two. The latter measure was often dramatically inflated in the second game. Each group then discusses its results. In particular students are encouraged to question each other on the strategies each member had been using and how the opportunity to communicate with others had affected his or her behavior. They are instructed to use this information when writing up the laboratory to help explain the results. Discussion varied. Many students referred to desirability of a fair distribution system within the group and the feeling that they had undertaken a social contract when agreeing to their group’s strategy. Others commented on the difficulty of deciding how many paperclips to leave in the box when they did not know the number of rounds remaining in the game. Students also pointed out that the groups that had left their paperclips to increase without retrieving any would have starved in the real world and left a village full of resources for other groups. What was most clear, however, was that in the majority of groups, a collective identity had formed and communication had resulted in “better” management of their paperclips; that is, they considered each other and did not

226


immediately grab the entire supply, leaving none for future rounds. The importance of both group identity and communication to cooperative resolution of social dilemmas has been consistently shown in research on this topic, and students are given two articles discussing this to use in their written report (i.e., Dawes & Messick, 2000; Van Vugt, 2009). Finally, the instructor gets the class to consider the real-world implications of the exercise. While the fishing industry can be seen as an example of the tragedy of the commons, it is also referred to as an example of trying to manage a resource. There have been government attempts in New Zealand to control the fisheries since 1938, and there are currently 117 species covered by a quota system (www. teara.govt.nz/en/fishing-industry). While there are problems with the system (such as the aforementioned orange roughy), it is not hard for the class to see that without any system at all, it is likely many more species would be threatened or fully depleted. Students readily provided other examples, such as the use of forestry resources, oil reserves, hunting of bird and game, and the release of agricultural byproducts into waterways. This exercise provides students with exposure to both the scientific and valuesbased components of psychological literacy. They must supply and analyze quantitative data (i.e., the distribution of paperclips, responses to the Likert-scale items) and qualitative data (i.e., their group discussion of behavioral motivations). Importantly, too, they must consider and weigh up many values such as how best to distribute resources, whether to leave resources for an uncertain future, and whether it is legitimate for one group to use up its supply and then claim that of another group. While our observations showed that not all groups came up with distribution strategies that provided an optimal result at the end of the game two, it was very clear to everyone that the opportunity to communicate and come up with an agreed strategy (or self-imposed rules) made for a better outcome by most measures, and that this is likely to be true when regulating resources in the real world as well as in the laboratory.

Animal Cognition: A Laboratory Exercise in a Third-Year Course on Environmental Psychology (William Helton) In New Zealand, as in many other countries, a number of disputed public issues involve animals and, in particular, the human perception of animals. New Zealand cases include the challenge to Japanese “scientific” whaling by protest groups occurring proximate to New Zealand’s territorial waters, the New Zealand policy of eliminating foreign invasive species using various chemical agents, cultural issues regarding animal handling such as Halal butchery, and animal welfare issues involving intensive or “factory” farming. Many of these issues are not only culturally important, but also have extensive economic implications: New Zealanders are concerned not only about the intrinsic worth of whales, but also about the impact that increased whaling may have on New Zealand’s growing ecotourism industry.


227

In my third-year course at the University of Canterbury in environmental psychology, students do an exercise designed to encourage them to think critically about animal cognition, consider the ethics of human management of animals, and explore the different value systems that underlie the relationship between people and animals. The exercise begins with the students rating a diverse set of animals using a modified version of the Attributes Questionnaire (AQ) developed by Herzog and Galvin (1997). In the modified AQ, the students are asked questions about 16 animals (ant, blue jay, brown bear, chimpanzee, dolphin, frog, lion, mouse, pigeon, rat, raven, snake, spider, turtle, wolf, and worm). The questions are: 1. How capable of pain are each of the following animals? 2. How capable of human-like emotions are each of the following animals? 3. To what degree are the following animals capable of suffering? 4. How much moral consideration do each of the following animals deserve? 5. To what degree are the following animals capable of reason? 6. To what extent are each of the following animals self-aware? For each of the six items students respond using the following Likert-type scale: (1) no or none, (2) little, (3) moderate, (4) high degree, and (5) very high or humanlike. The average student response for a typical environmental psychology course for question 4 (moral worth) can be seen in Figure 16.1. The students’ ratings are then used to initiate the discussion of three issues: first, the relative rank order of animals; second, the extreme range of responses given by respondents for each animal; and third, the correlations between the questions. When discussing the rank ordering of animals on the six questions, an issue that immediately becomes apparent is why some animals are ranked lower than others. Rats are often ranked lower than other animals, even though most scientists would probably challenge this on behavioral grounds (i.e., rats are a fairly intelligent and adaptive species). The most compelling explanation for this discrepancy is cultural, as rats are often portrayed as vermin and disease carriers, and these views may bias the ratings among students. This serves as a starting point for further classroom discussion regarding the role that culture and environmental circumstances play in framing animals. A further case in point is the European aversion to eating dogs while having little difficulty eating pigs, despite pigs and dogs being similar in cognitive abilities. For example, in some East Asian cultures, eating dogs is as acceptable as eating pigs. However, the data invariably show that culture is not the complete answer. While there is generally similarity within cultural groups in the ranking of animals on the AQ, there is considerable variation in the absolute ratings given by individual students, shown by large standard deviations. Students are encouraged to think about the difficulties this poses for democracies in which some consensus needs to be developed regarding animal-related policies—for example, whether New Zealand should file a complaint with Australia over Japanese whaling in the

228

T h e P s y c h ologically L ite r ate C itizen Chimp Dolphin Brown Bear Lion Wolf Blue Jay Turtle Frog Raven Pigeon Snake Mouse Rat Ant Worm Spider 1

1.5

2

2.5 3 3.5 Mean rating (+/− SD)

4

4.5

5

Figure 16.1â•‡ Third-year students’ ratings in response to the question “How much moral consideration do each of the following animals deserve?” using a scale from 1 = none to 5 = very high or human-like.

South Pacific, or whether intensive “factory” farming should be encouraged in New Zealand. In addition, realizing the difficulty of intracultural consensus can help students see that other cultures’ views of animals are equally as complex, and may reduce any tendencies they have to make blanket ethnic stereotypes. Finally, the philosopher Daniel Dennett (1996) proposed that human morality is “mind-centric.” In other words, we believe that only things with minds can be injured or hurt. The typically strong correlations found between the students’ ratings of an animal’s capacity to reason and self-awareness with their ratings of moral concern (Pearson r values ranging from +0.51 to +0.68) provide a way to discuss this issue in the class (Helton & Helton, 2005). If someone kicked a beach ball across the classroom, the students might think it was odd, but not inhumane or sadistic. If someone kicked a pumpkin across the room, the students might think that was even odder, but again not sadistic or inhumane. If, however, someone kicked a small kitten across the room, it would be considered both inhumane and sadistic. Why is this? Dennett would say it is because we believe kittens are alive, have “minds,” and can suffer. Most people agree that people have moral obligations to things with minds. This argument brings the exercise full circle, showing students how their ratings of the attributes of particular animals are tied to their response to issues of animal welfare. This exercise nurtures many of the skills of psychological literacy. The scientific foundation of psychology is clear as students are required to gather data and attend carefully to the results. In particular, by examining characteristics of


229

the data such as the range, standard deviation, differences within and between cultural groups, and the correlation between items measuring how animals are assumed to “think” and how much moral consideration they deserve, students are obliged to reason scientifically. They cannot simply fall back on their assumptions about animal welfare and the ethical superiority of their own culture’s relationship to animals; they must make arguments that take account of the empirical evidence before them. Furthermore, the entire exercise is an ethical discussion that gets to the core of some heated political debates. Why, for example, do New Zealanders object to Japanese whaling, when we eradicate massive numbers of our own possums as a pest? (Possums are indigenous to Australia, and when introduced to New Zealand, multiplied rapidly, consuming native forest as they did so.) Are whales objectively more “minded” than possums? While these questions are not necessarily resolved in the course, discussing them gives the students a more comprehensive understanding of the issues and insight into their own thinking about animal welfare. It might indeed look hypocritical for New Zealand to defend whales, but eradicate non-indigenous species, or judge some cultures for eating dogs, while having bacon and eggs for breakfast.

An Environmental Psychology Course for Fourth-Year Students (Taciano L. Milfont) A recently created fourth-year course provides an introduction to environmental psychology for both psychology majors and students from other disciplines interested in gaining psychological insight into environmental issues. Topics include the scientific evidence regarding a number of environmental issues, including the need for a multidisciplinary effort to tackle these problems; psychological factors that lead people to engage in conservation behavior; environmental risk perception and assessment; and interventions designed to change human behavior. The course is primarily composed of seminars led by students. Given the interdisciplinary nature of the issue, guest lectures from geography, environmental science, architecture, and the New Zealand Climate Change Institute also give talks. The course is designed to use and complement university-wide initiatives to increase sustainability. Victoria University is a signatory of the Talloires DeclaÂ� ration, a sustainability agreement that involves 418 tertiary institutions as of April 2010 (www.ulsf.org/talloires_declaration.html). In addition, the university has a document on learning for sustainability that has helped guide the design of this course. As part of the university’s commitment to sustainability, an Environmental Champions group has selected 10 potential campus projects: (1) recycle and reuse furniture, (2) how the university deals with electronic waste, (3) the use of plastic bottles among students and staff, (4) alternatives to polystyrene coffee cups, (5) fair-trade-certified coffee and tea, (6) composting options, (7) “switch off lights”

230


and “save energy” campaigns, (8) introduce “green office” principles, (9) sustainable transport options (encouraging use of public transport, cycling, and walking), and (10) regularly communicate sustainability initiatives and successful projects implemented throughout the university. To incorporate these university-level initiatives in the course, one assignment requires students to assess the School of Psychology’s “green office” principles, including waste and energy practices as well as the extent to which staff are engaged in environmental actions and decision making (the principles are based on a program run by the University of Queensland; see www.uq.edu.au/sustainability/green-office-program). It is written up as a group project. In the first part of the assignment, students conduct an environmental assessment to gather data on the school’s performance. This includes a walk-through survey in which they observe “reduce/reuse/recycle” in action and gather information on whether the school recycles paper, uses disposable cups and cutlery, and has stickers for recycling, energy, and water awareness. Students then conduct one-to-one interviews with the purchasing officer to gather data on procurement practices (e.g., whether the school purchases environmentally friendly paper, recycles printer cartridges) and with staff and students on their specific behaviors (e.g., whether staff and students minimize printing, avoid printing e-mails, recycle paper). In the second part of the assignment, students collate the information gathered and prepare an assessment report. The report indicates the areas in which the school is performing well, and areas in need of improvement. Students must also provide specific recommendations. The entire project is conducted with input from the university’s environmental manager and the Environmental Champions group, and both the head of the school of psychology and the school manager have signed their support. How does this project nurture psychological literacy and citizenship? By conducting the surveys and interviews and writing up the assessment report, students’ scientific skills are developed as they must be able to gather relevant data as well as analyze, interpret, and report them in a meaningful way. To create a consensual report, they must have values-based discussions and reach agreement on what to report and what recommendations to give. Finally, this is a practical assignment that demonstrates citizenship in action, as they must communicate their findings effectively to the school staff.

Research Project on Building a Sustainable School (Niki Harré) Three years ago, I initiated an action research project at a local high school. The school had recently introduced a goal to “work towards environmental sustainability in all areas of school life,” and the research project was designed to help the school achieve this goal while also documenting the process. From the beginning the project has involved fourth-year BA or BSc Honours students who are required to do a research dissertation, worth about 40% of their year’s work. These students work as part of a team with me as supervisor and a masters or PhD student.


231

As a team our approach is based on six working principles derived from community psychology: strengths-based, empowerment, role-modeling, communication, measurement, and feedback. The strengths-based principle has three major threads. First, we seek people at the school who are interested in sustainability and work with them. To date, most of our work has been with the school’s student environment leaders, a small selection of dedicated teachers, a member of the school board, and travel and waste coordinators from the local council. Second, we construct projects based on the (non-sustainability-related) strengths of the school. For example, we held a workshop for students to paint the sides of new waste stations, drawing on the school’s reputation for art. Third, we use our own strengths. One of the students (Charlotte Blythe, who is now pursuing a PhD on the project) had a background in film, and so in 2009 she made two films with the school students (see www.gogreenwithgumby on YouTube). To foster empowerment (principle 2) we work in partnership with the school and try to help the student environment leaders with decision making and the political processes involved in making change, rather than imposing our own views. The third principle, role-modeling, has required our team to behave consistently with what we are advocating. We (almost always) walk, cycle, or take the bus to school, and provide local and often homemade food with organic or fair-trade ingredients for meetings and events when possible. At a more general level we try to be open and enthusiastic and to support sustainability initiatives that are initiated by the school, as these are precisely the qualities we hope the school will show towards our project. Communication (principle 4) requires us to set up and maintain a variety of methods for connecting with people. We e-mail everyone, but have also learned to phone teachers at lunchtime, drop into the school, text and call students on their cell phones, and hold regular meetings. We have also set up a Facebook page. The fifth principle of measurement is important for the school’s records, for the research training of the university students, and for transmitting lessons to a wider audience. We have used an extremely diverse set of methods, ranging from questionnaires, behavioral counts, focus groups, individual interviews, waste audits, and observations. In keeping with the action research model we constantly feed these results back into the school (principle 6), if possible getting school students to help us with the analysis and the feedback process. For example, one year we held statistics workshops for mathematics students that allowed them to explore the data from a school-wide questionnaire and then present the results to their peers at assemblies. Each year the practical projects at the school have varied, although we have settled into a focus on waste management (as Lesley Stone, the sustainability coordinator at our university, has said: “Organisations usually start with the rubbish”). For more details on this work, see Blythe and Harré (in preparation). From the perspective of educating the psychologically literate citizen, this program allows a small number of students not only to become more skilled in the scientific process through the variety of measurement tools they are exposed to, but also to experience values-based thinking, self-reflection, and citizenship in a very connected way. Values are not hypothetical in this project; they are real.

232


Students do not write essays on the merits of sustainable transport (although they may include related material in their dissertations) but they must decide how they are going to get to the school, knowing that their transport mode will be observed. They do not have an exam on food miles, but may be charged with choosing fruit for an event. In addition, they get a feel for the politics of social change. They see the difficulties and rewards of being a sustainability advocate, both in relation to their own attempts to advocate for change at the school, and through intimate observation of the attempts of the students and teachers involved in the project. They are obliged, through the complementary demands of the school and their dissertation, to constantly translate between these two worlds.

Conclusion: Suggestions for Incorporating Sustainability into Teaching for Psychologically Literate Citizens The current ecological crisis is of enormous relevance to psychology. Psychology has been slow to contribute fully to this issue, perhaps because we have traditionally focused on resolving disputes within and between people. This dispute, the one between our species and the environment on which we depend, is in danger of roaring past us, while our knowledge, skills, and values as psychologists and teachers of psychology remain largely untapped. Our case studies come from a New Zealand context but reflect issues faced by people everywhere: how to cooperate in the sustainable and equitable use of resources, how cognitions and moral reasoning are affected by culture, and how to use one’s psychological literacy to effect social change. We urge psychology educators worldwide to consider how they can nurture the psychologically literate citizen through a focus on this most pressing of collective issues.

References Alinksy, S. D. (1971). Rules for radicals: a pragmatic primer for realistic radicals. New York: Vintage Books. Blythe, C., & Harré, N. (in preparation). Operating principles for an action research school sustainability project. Cialdini, R. B. (2003). Crafting normative messages to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 105–109. Clayton, S., & Myers, G. (2009). Conservation psychology: understanding and promoting human care for nature. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Corral-Verdugo, V., García-Cadena, C. H., & Frías-Arment, M. Psychological approaches to sustainability: Current trends in theory, research and practice. New York: Nova Science. Davie, M. G. (2008). Evaluating a group-based sustainability intervention using the theory of planned behaviour. Unpublished master’s thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.


233

Dawes, R. M., & Messick, D. M. (2000). Social dilemmas. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 111–116. Dennett, D. C. (1996). Kinds of minds. New York: Basic Books. Gifford, R. (2008). Psychology’s essential role in alleviating the impacts of climate change. Canadian Psychology, 49, 273–280. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248. Helton, W. S., & Helton, N. D. (2005). Changing animal and environmental attitudes with evidence of animal minds. Applied Environmental Education and Communication, 4, 317–323. Herzog, H. A., & Galvin, S. (1997). Common sense and the mental lives of animals: An empirical approach. In R. W. Mitchell, N. S. Thompson, & H. L. Miles (Eds.) Anthropomorphism, anecdotes, and animals (pp. 237–253). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Kahan, D. (2010). Fixing the communications failure. Nature, 463, 296–297. Koger, S. M., & Scott, B. A. (2007). Psychology and environmental sustainability: a call for integration. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 10–18. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E., Jr., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Milfont, T. L. (2010). Global warming, climate change and human psychology. In V. Corral-Verdugo, C. H. García-Cadena, & M. Frías-Arment (Eds.), Psychological approaches to sustainability: current trends in theory, research and practice (pp. 19–42). New York: Nova Science. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystem and well-being: synthesis report. Washington, D. C.: Island Press. Miller, C. R. (2008). Development and validation of a student-focused pro-environmental food lifestyle behaviour measure. Unpublished honours thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Myers, D. G. (2010). Social psychology (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Orr, D. W. (1992). Ecological literacy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Schmuck, P., & Schultz, W. P. (2002). Sustainable development as a challenge for psychology. In P. Schmuck & W. P. Schultz (Eds.), Psychology of sustainable development (pp. 3–18). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Van Vugt, M. (2009). Averting the tragedy of the commons. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 169–173. Vlek, C., & Steg, L. (2007). Human behavior and environmental sustainability: problems, driving forces, and research topics. Journal of Social Issues, 63, 1–19.

17 Fostering Psychologically Literate Citizens A Canadian Perspective S t e v e C h a r lto n a n d J o c e ly n Lym b u r n e r

A

major issue that educational institutions and psychological organizations have grappled with is what student outcomes should be expected from an undergraduate psychology degree (e.g., APA, 2007). McGovern and colleagues (2010) recently suggested that a primary outcome of an undergraduate psychology degree should be psychological literacy, a concept somewhat akin to the notion of a liberal education. As defined by these authors, psychological literacy includes such concepts as critical thinking, effective communication, a respect for diversity, and the ability to apply psychological principles to one’s life. McGovern and colleagues further proposed that psychological literacy can provide the foundation for the development of the psychologically literate or global citizen. This latter concept extends the notion of psychological literacy in that it further emphasizes social responsibility, ethical commitment, and the application of psychological literacy at both a community and global level. Although the development of a global or psychologically literate citizen is obviously a multidisciplinary pursuit, psychology as a discipline is particularly well suited for this task. In the following chapter we argue that colleges and universities have a duty to offer a breadth of courses and course assignments to foster psychological literacy and ultimately the development of psychologically literate Canadian citizens. This chapter will focus on how the teaching of psychological literacy can have an impact on Canadian society by examining the role of psychologically literate citizens in addressing pressing social issues in this country. We explore how psychological literacy may improve decision making and ethical behavior with regard to a number of key Canadian issues: volunteerism, environmental sustainability, illicit drug use, healthcare, and multiculturalism and diversity. In addition to demonstrating how psychological literacy may be taught through class exercises specific to these social issues, we also offer a recent Canadian psychology degree as a model of how this goal might be met on a broader scale.

Fostering Psychologically Literate Citizens

235

At a college or a university, the courses that instructors offer as well as the assignments made therein are concrete manifestations of what educators consider important. Astin (1989) argued that in this pursuit we must be mindful of the types of students we are creating—are they more humane, more concerned with the welfare of others—are they global citizens? This focus appears to be particularly important in light of recent literature that suggests that today’s students are increasingly entitled and concerned with their individual pursuits as opposed to civic engagement (e.g., Twenge, 2006). Astin and Antonio’s (2000) work suggests that universities have a role to play in building the character of their students. Specifically, these authors found that college-based interracial experiences, participation in leadership activities, and volunteer work were among the factors that were critical to character development, broadly defined as the values exemplified in students’ interactions with one another and their moral decisions and behavior (e.g., civic responsibility, cultural sensitivity). Undergraduate psychology degrees in Canada are, for the most part, similar to those of a number of countries, including Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom. A Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in Canada varies in length from 3 to 4 years, depending on the province in which the degree is offered. A recently designed, applied BA degree at Kwantlen Polytechnic University in Vancouver is a good example of a psychology degree that meets the quality benchmarks set by Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, Halonen, and Hill (2007). This degree is also an excellent exemplar of the type of curriculum that places a strong emphasis on psychological literacy. The degree was designed both to prepare students for graduate school and to make students job-ready should they decide to seek employment on completion of their undergraduate degree. To ensure that students’ learning outcomes would appeal to potential employers, over 50 local, governmental, and private-sector employers from the lower mainland of British Columbia were surveyed and interviewed about which attributes and skill sets they would most want to see in new recruits. The attributes the employers identified as most important were “strong critical thinking and analytic skills, knowledge of interpersonal dynamics and the ability to work effectively in teams, skills in data acquisition and evaluation, cultural awareness, an awareness and understanding of the globally pervasive dynamics of change and an understanding of humantechnology issues to deal effectively with the information technology systems that have become the backbone of the new economy” (Hamilton, Charlton, & Elmes, 2008, p. 25). These attributes and outcomes are similar to those recommended by the American Psychological Association (Dunn, Mehrotra, & Halonen, 2004) as well as other employer surveys (Hart Research Associates, 2008; see McGovern et al., 2010). To meet these needs, the Kwantlen psychology department created a set of courses in addition to their main content courses that included the following areas: interpersonal relations, cultural psychology, human factors and ergonomics, tests and measurements, technical report writing, professional and ethical issues, and a workplace practicum (Hamilton et al., 2008; Kwantlen Polytechnic University: http://www.kwantlen.bc.ca/calendar/programs/ apsych-bc.html).

236

T he P s y ch o l o gically L iterate C iti z e n

The development of psychologically literate citizens is important for the wellbeing of both individuals and society. Canada was recently ranked number 4 by the United Nations on the 2009 Human Development Index (HDI) (United Nations Human Development Program, 2009). The HDI, a measure of well-being, compares all UN-recognized countries on three primary measures: standard of living, literacy, and life expectancy. Although Canada is one of the wealthiest nations in the world, it still needs to deal with many of the same social issues that other countries face and, as a country with greater economic prosperity, it also needs to address the role that it can play in helping countries that are less fortunate. Psychological literacy can play a role in some key social issues facing Canadians today, including volunteerism, environmental sustainability, healthcare, drugs, poverty, crime, immigration, and foreign aid. Discussion of all of the possible issues is beyond the scope of this chapter; therefore, we will focus on only a few of the major social issues to which psychological literacy may contribute: volunteerism, healthcare, medical literacy, drug abuse, environmental sustainability, and multiculturalism and diversity.

Volunteerism Canada has long been hallowed as a generous nation. The Canada Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating (CSGVP) revealed that in 2007 84 percent of the population aged 15 and over made a financial donation to a charitable or other nonprofit organization; 46 percent of the population aged 15 and over volunteered; and 84 percent offered direct help to others who lived outside their household. Indeed, Canadians volunteered almost 2.1 billion hours in 2007—the equivalent of over 1 million full-time jobs. Interestingly, characteristics of those with the highest rates of volunteering included youth (i.e., 15 to 24 years old), higher levels of formal education, and those who had a history of charity work (Statistics Canada, 2007). Our position is that Canadian psychology programs can play an important role in both maintaining and increasing the high rates of volunteerism in the country by making a concerted and widespread effort to incorporate service-learning opportunities into their undergraduate degrees. Academic service-learning is an educational approach that integrates service in the community with an intentional learning agenda—that is, students engage in volunteer and service work within agencies that are thematically linked to their academic courses. Dunn and coworkers (2007) suggested that one of the benchmarks of excellence in a psychology program is the provision of structured service-learning experiences that link explicitly with psychological content. These authors also emphasized the importance of establishing strong links between the university and local communities, noting that distinguished programs are those that, in Miller’s (1969) words, “give psychology away.” The research literature suggests that service-learning, when done well, builds student citizenship skills and values, strengthens academic learning, contributes to social and personal development, and fosters the development of critical thinking (e.g., Eyler, Giles, &


237

Schmiede, 1996). Additionally, Hurtado (2005) reports that service-learning increased student’s self-confidence in their leadership abilities and enhanced their democratic skills, concern for the public good, and the value they placed on making civic contributions. Importantly, Tomkovick, Lester, Flunker, and Wells (2008) reported that students who were engaged in service-learning activities during their schooling volunteered at about twice the rate of the national average for that age group when surveyed 5 years after graduation. Indeed, past volunteerism was the most powerful determinant of future volunteerism behavior (e.g., Tomkovick et al., 2008). The consistent integration of service-learning opportunities in Canadian psychology programs is a natural starting point in fostering global citizenship among our students. Teaching practices and activities involving service-learning include the following: • Instructors of developmental psychology might require students to volunteer 15 to 30 hours of tutoring in a local primary or elementary school while keeping an academic journal that integrates their experience with course concepts and research findings. • In a psychopathology class, students might work individually or in groups to create an outreach project in service to the mental health community (e.g., psychology trivia board game for elementary school children; presentation on self-harm for the university’s psychiatric nursing program; a YouTube video debunking myths about schizophrenia). • Programs might integrate full service-learning courses in which students volunteer 120 hours over the course of a semester. Class requirements might include an academic journal, literature review, and synthesis of personal experience with literature and agency perspectives.

Health and Medicine Health and medicine is one area where psychological literacy can aid decision making in a number of ways. Psychological research, ethical considerations, and a better understanding of the benefits of preventive medicine may lead to support for standardized healthcare for all individuals in a society. Regardless of one’s political leaning or personal wealth, all individuals have an equal right to healthcare. Currently, Canada has socialized healthcare, with medical care available to all individuals. That said, however, Canada still has room for improvement: its healthcare system was ranked number 30 in the World Health Organization’s 2000 comparative report on world health systems and number 6 in terms of preventable deaths with healthcare in industrialized countries (Nolte & McKee, 2008). On this latter statistic, Canada did better than the United States, which scored last at 19th, and the United Kingdom, which scored 16th, but worse than France, Japan, Australia, Spain, and Italy, which scored from 1st to 5th respectively.

238


Furthermore, the healthcare system is still a controversial subject, with some people arguing for the addition of privatized healthcare for individuals who can afford it and who want to expedite their care. Similarly, dental care, prescription drugs, and psychological care (with the exception of psychiatric services) do not fall under the public health plan and are less available to those who cannot afford those services. Psychological literacy can also contribute to medical literacy on both an individual and societal level. Statistical literacy, one aspect of psychological literacy (McGovern et al., 2010), may aid in one’s understanding of and critical analysis of medical issues. For example, as Gigerenzer, Gaissmaier, Kurz-Milcke, Schwartz, and Woloshin (2008) point out, statistical illiteracy (i.e., the inability to understand the meaning of numbers) can lead doctors, patients, journalists, and politicians to misconstrue health statistics. Statistical illiteracy may be particularly damaging with (a) journalists, given the widespread influence of media, and (b) politicians, given their role in policymaking. According to Gigerenzer and colleagues (2008), a better understanding of probabilities, more transparent communication, teaching using real-world problems, and the use of “frequency statements instead of single-event probabilities, absolute risks instead of relative risks, mortality rates instead of survival rates, and natural frequencies instead of conditional probabilities” (p. 53) would help deal with this illiteracy. As they also note, “statistical literacy is a necessary precondition for an educated citizenship in a technological democracy” (p. 53).

A Case Study in Health and Medicine Following is an example of how psychological literacy may aid decision making in an individual medical situation. S.C. was diagnosed with melanoma in situ (only on the first layer of skin) and was informed that he would need immediate surgery that would leave him with extensive facial damage. His doctor informed him that he had no choice and that it was imperative that he have the surgery, given the high mortality rates for melanoma. Following principles similar to those suggested by Gigerenzer and his colleagues (2008), S.C., relying on his psychology background, conducted a search of the medical journals to find out everything he could about melanoma and melanoma in situ, its incidence, the probability of death according to different time delays, possible alternatives to surgery, and the probability of recovery for each alternative. Because melanoma is such a serious skin cancer, surgery is the standard of care; however, S.C. did find a small number of melanoma in situ patients who for cosmetic reasons received a cream that was normally used for less serious skin cancer. S.C. found that the probability of dying from melanoma in situ or having it become more serious within a year was low, and therefore there was room for experimenting with other alternatives rather than rushing into surgery. Furthermore, the research showed that the probability of eliminating the cancer with surgery was approximately 98 percent, whereas the probability for the cream was 88 percent. With this newfound knowledge S.C.


239

went back to the dermatologist and asked about trying the cream. Initially the dermatologist was very much against the idea. However, after S.C. shared the research he found and explained that he was willing to accept the risk, the doctor reluctantly conceded. After several months of aggressive treatment with the cream, a one-year follow-up showed no indication that the cancer had recurred. In this case, psychological literacy played a substantial role in this patient’s recovery. His knowledge of journals and how to search for them, his background in research and statistics, and his comprehension of probability allowed him to make a more informed decision about his own health. Furthermore, to some extent, he reduced his stress levels by actively participating in his own health decisions. However, the outcome was important at more than just a personal level: the doctor was quite surprised by the outcome and has subsequently expressed an interest in publishing a paper on the importance of patient and doctor risk perception and now sees the cream as a viable alternative for patients facing surgery with cosmetic complications. Ultimately, publication may result in a change of perspective for some doctors, and future patients may be offered alternative methods. Here is an example of a class activity examining medicine and health. It requires students to examine the role of risk perception, probabilities, base rates, and critical evaluation of sources of information in a medical situation. Students are required to search PubMed, PsycInfo, Internet sources, and newspapers for information on the recent H1N1 influenza outbreak. The H1N1 virus is an excellent topic given the level of fear that surrounded the issue, the number of different opinions regarding risk, and the proposed courses of action and the amount of misinformation that existed, particularly in the media. Each student may be asked to write a short report answering a series of questions on his or her perception of the risk, and methods used to thwart a potential pandemic. Some of the issues they should address are the validity of the source of the information, how the estimated number of H1N1 deaths compares with the estimated number of deaths from the regular seasonal influenza, what methods are used to estimate the number of deaths from influenza and their relative accuracy, potential risks if any from taking the vaccine, and types of similar pandemics have occurred in the past.

Drugs Licit and illicit drugs are another area that has a tremendous impact on society. The abuse of drugs presents important social, healthcare, and legal challenges to all societies. Psychological literacy may provide an important contribution to decision making regarding various issues surrounding drugs, such as potential overprescribing or overconsumption of prescription drugs, the war on drugs, decriminalization of illicit drugs, methadone and heroin prescriptions, education programs such as Project DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education), and needle injection or exchange sites. Despite the huge financial costs and impact on the

240


health and welfare of individuals and society, decision making regarding drugs is often fraught with politics, emotion, and a lack of education or research. Nutt, King, Saulsbury, and Blakemore (2007) argued that there is a need for an evidence-based classification system that provides objective ratings of each drug’s relative harms, including physical harms, dependency, and social harms. They suggested that one problem that is central to most drug issues is that there is no clear, agreed-upon system for classifying the dangerousness of licit and illicit drugs. Opinion about the dangerousness of each individual drug varies within and across societies. Yet how dangerous a drug is perceived to be may have a profound impact on the amount of financial resources and types of health resources that are allocated for prevention and treatment. The perceived dangerousness of a drug may also influence social or legal policy. For example, in Canada, advertising of tobacco is banned, but it is legal to advertise alcohol (e.g., beer companies frequently sponsor sporting events). This policy is rooted in the perception that smoking is much more dangerous than alcohol consumption, yet research suggests that both drugs are very damaging, accounting for about 90 percent of all drug-related deaths (Nutt et al., 2007). As an intoxicant, alcohol, unlike tobacco, promotes many social harms, including deaths from motor vehicle accidents, violence, and family and employment problems. Similarly, the perceived dangerousness of a drug may determine whether a drug is legalized and, if not, the penalty for possession or distribution of that drug. For example, possession of a relatively small quantity of marijuana may bring a potential death sentence in one country’s legal system (e.g., Singapore) and a conditional discharge in another (e.g., Canada). Similarly, more money and resources may be spent on attempts to control or eradicate the use and distribution of a drug that is perceived to be dangerous. More police officers may be used for drug enforcement, more money may be spent on the incarceration of prisoners, and more time may be taken up by the judicial system handling the individual legal cases. Canada has taken a more lenient stance on illegal drugs compared to the United States, which has initiated a War on Drugs campaign. Not surprisingly, the United States has a higher number of police officers per capita and approximately seven times the incarceration rate per capita compared to Canada (United Nations Development Program, 2007). Canada, at 4.5 percent, has one of the lowest rates of incarceration for drug offenses in the world, whereas in the United States 19.5 percent of state prisoners and 53 percent of federal prisoners are incarcerated for drug offenses (Bewley-Taylor, Hallam, & Allen, 2009). Attitudes and opinions about various aspects of licit and illicit drugs may change through education. For example, research has shown that higher education is associated with a more liberal attitude toward some drugs such as marijuana (Savas, 1998). Similarly, a study of Canadian judges in Ontario found that judges with a greater knowledge of drugs were more likely to favor harm-reduction approaches to drugs (Macdonald & Erickson, 1999). One example of harm reduction that has generated considerable controversy since its inception in Canada in 1989 is needle exchange sites. Although Vancouver has one of the largest needle exchange programs in North America—and Canada as


241

a whole has many needle exchange sites—there is ongoing political pressure and community dissent over having these programs in their neighborhoods. For example, Abbotsford, a small city adjacent to Vancouver, has one of the highest crime rates in Canada and the fourth highest rate for drug offenses in Canada (Statistics Canada, 2008), yet it has a city bylaw banning needle exchange sites. Research, however, has consistently shown that needle exchange programs are very cost-effective and reduce the transmission of disease; contrary to some criticisms, such programs do not lead to increased drug use or discarded needles in adjacent areas (Hankins, 1997). Needle exchange programs are an example where psychological literacy may help citizens be more willing and equipped to embrace social challenges of this type. A better understanding of research might dispel some people’s fears and help them to appreciate the financial and healthcare benefits of such programs. Also, the more humane and ethical aspects of a harm-reduction approach are consistent with our definition of the global or psychologically literate citizen. The following are some potential classroom activities to increase psychological literacy on the topic of drugs: • Divide the class into two and assign one half the task of searching the Internet/newspapers/popular non-science magazines (e.g., Cosmopolitan) and public service announcements for information about the dangers of specific drugs. The other half of the class should do the same assignment, but with journal articles obtained through PsycInfo and drug textbooks. Each group lists the benefits and dangers of about seven drugs (e.g., heroin, Ecstasy, marijuana, tobacco, alcohol, LSD, cocaine) based only on their research. The students should also give an average overall rating of how dangerous a particular drug is. After completing their charts everyone is required to read an article on classification of drugs by Nutt and colleagues (2007). The class can then discuss and compare the two lists to examine the types of misinformation that exist in popular media. • Students can explore popular claims about various drugs that they may have heard about in popular media by searching PsycInfo or PubMed for research on these topics. Examples of some controversial topics may be whether LSD causes flashbacks, secondhand smoke is worse than regular smoke, two drinks of alcohol per day reduces heart attacks, or marijuana is a stepping stone to harder drugs. • Students could examine methods of drug education in this third activity. Students are required to write a research paper about drug education programs such as DARE (Lynam et al., 1999), and then identify potential benefits or problems of public service announcements such as drunken-driving ads or ads with warnings about the dangers of drugs. For example, one popular ad in North America showed eggs frying in a pan with the verbal warning that this is what drugs do to your brain. Students can examine whether fear-based ads work and whether ads with no factual or educational content are effective.

242


• Students may visit a needle exchange site as part of a field trip. Each student would be required to do a literature search on PsycInfo and PubMed and then compose a detailed chart showing the potential pros and cons associated with needle exchange sites.

Environmental Sustainability In a nation known for its sheer geographical size and ample resources, it is not surprising that in survey after survey Canadians avow strong environmental values. The World Values study found that 64 percent of Canadians prioritized the environment even at the expense of economic growth and job loss (National Post, 2005). The vast majority of Canadians also report feeling concerned about the state of the environment (Boyd, 2003). Despite our voiced environmental concern, it is equally clear that our behavior does not conform to our attitudes. The Organization for Economic Growth and Development (OCED) publishes biannual statistics on a broad range of environmental indicators. In a University of Victoria study using OCED statistics to compare Canada with 28 other countries, Canada’s overall ranking was second-to-last (Boyd, 2003). Reports prepared by the Canadian Parliamentary Research Branch note that Canadians use twice as much water as Europeans, are among the world’s greatest producers of waste on a per capita basis, and consume 30 percent more energy than necessary (Bourdages, 1997). The UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (“The Decade”) identified the integration of the principles, values, and practices of sustainable development into all aspects of education and learning as a key goal. Similarly, Reid and Petocz (2006) noted that participants in the Johannesburg Earth Summit felt that sustainable development was the responsibility of all educational and disciplinary domains, and indeed held education as a key agent for change. Given the mismatch between the strong value Canadians place on the environment and their lackadaisical sustainability behavior, it is our position that any attempt to produce a psychologically literate Canadian undergraduate must necessarily include an effort to address environmental issues in the classroom. A broad array of human activities, including energy production and use, agriculture, industry, and deforestation, pose a serious threat to the environment (McKenzie-Mohr & Oskamp, 1995). As experts in the study of human behavior, psychologists are in a position to play an important role in advocating for sustainability practices. Unfortunately, as described by Clayton and Brook (2005), many of the individuals who work and study in the field of psychology do not see the link between psychology and the environment. Similarly, environmental programs tend not to include psychology courses nor recognize the potential relevance of the discipline. Clayton and Brook (2005) contended that the area of conservation psychology has a great deal to add to environmental initiatives as it brings the human factor back into the mix, examining the social and physical context, existing schemas,


243

and personal motives to help policymakers design more effective interventions. Beyond the development of specific conservation courses, a number of authors have also argued for the importance of integrating environmental issues into the core psychology curriculum. Koger and Scott (2007) have been critical in identifying the ways in which this might happen, including behavioral psychology (e.g., how might reinforcement affect recycling behavior?), social psychology (e.g., how do social norms affect littering behavior?), clinical psychology (e.g., how does our natural environment affect our mental health?), and developmental psychology (e.g., how do we foster sustainable behavior in young children?). These authors have developed a comprehensive online manual, Teaching Psychology for Sustainability, and we refer the reader to their excellent website for a wide range of ideas for integration into all psychology classes (http://www.teachgreenpsych.com; Scott & Koger, 2006). As educators it is our position that it is also critical to model sustainable behavior in the classroom. For example, instead of distributing lecture notes in hard copy, students might be encouraged to use laptops in class to access this information, course outlines might include a rule discouraging the use of disposable water bottles and coffee cups in class, and test booklets could be reused.

Multiculturalism and Diversity Under the guidance of Pierre Trudeau in the 1970s and 1980s, multiculturalism was adopted as the official policy of the Canadian government. The 2001 Canadian census revealed that the proportion of Canada’s population who were born outside the country had reached a 70-year peak and stands at 18.4 percent, second only to Australia. In Canada, international visa students represent 7 percent of the fulltime undergraduate population, compared to 2 percent in the United States. Canadian universities attract fulltime students from over 200 countries. Statistics Canada reported that 16 percent of undergraduates self-identified as visible minorities in their 2001 census. Unfortunately, only 6 percent of the Aboriginal population of Canada between the ages of 25 and 64 have an undergraduate degree, compared with 20 percent of the Canadian population (AUCC, 2007); this is an area that needs further attention. Women make up the majority of the undergraduate population: 59 percent in 2000–01. In other realms of diversity, college or university tends to be a key place for the development of students’ sexual identities (e.g., Renn & Bilodeau, 2005). with 1.0 percent of Canadians aged 18 to 59 identifying themselves as homosexual and 0.7 percent identifying themselves as bisexual (Statistics Canada, 2003). It is our perspective that awareness and respect for diversity issues is a key feature of the psychologically literate student and that it is incumbent upon faculty to ensure that diversity plays a critical role in classroom education. Given the diversity of today’s student body, it is perhaps not surprising, though nonetheless distressing, that research has consistently revealed frequent incidents of overt and more subtle bias on university campuses. Undergraduates report that

244


they personally have been targets of bias connected to their ethnicity, sex, religion, sexual orientation, and disability and that the majority of this bias occurs in the classroom. Boysen, Vogel, Cope, and Hubbard (2009) noted that 44 percent of the students in their sample had perceived overt bias in the classroom and 63 percent of the students had noted covert or subtle bias, including such incidents as stereotypes, isolation, offensive humor, and direct insults. Importantly, student estimates of bias in the classroom tend to be consistently higher than faculty estimates, suggesting that faculty may not always be aware of these incidents (Boysen et al., 2009). In the last decade the APA has pushed strongly for the inclusion of multiculturalism in the undergraduate psychology curriculum. Dunn and colleagues (2007) noted that one of the benchmarks of distinction for a psychology program is active attention to diversity and respect for individual and cultural differences. There is a large body of research suggesting that the educational system is an excellent forum within which to have a positive impact on students’ attitudes and awareness about diversity (Smith & Wolf-Wendel, 2005). Given that psychology is the study of human cognition and behavior, it is clear that an examination of diversity and different cultures is integral to the discipline. However, despite what may seem like a clear connection, a survey conducted by the Diversity Task Force of the Society for the Teaching of Psychology found that almost one third of psychology teachers did not believe that diversity issues were relevant to their courses (Simoni, Sexton-Radek, Yescavage, Richard, & Lundquist, 1999). Sciame-Giesecke, Roden, and Parkison (2009) took a closer look at faculty members’ beliefs and practices about integrating diversity education. Specifically, they examined four dimensions of the multicultural teaching model: faculty reflection, teaching methods, course content, and students. These authors found that, as a group, faculty members do attend to diversity issues and make an effort to ensure that curricular content reflects diversity. However, the focus of these efforts was concentrated on integrating material into course content (90 percent) and altering teaching methods to accommodate students from diverse backgrounds (49 percent), while few faculty members reported a self-reflective component (16 percent) or reflected on student diversity within the classroom (18 percent). In addition to improving the classroom environment and fostering more respect for diversity, research reveals that integrating a multicultural perspective in classroom teaching leads to multiple additional benefits. Martin (2010) contended that teaching diversity enables students to perceive issues from multiple perspectives, fosters critical thinking skills, and promotes students’ willingness to learn from their peers. Elicker, Snell, and O’Malley (2010) reported that when students perceive an emphasis on diversity in the psychology classroom, they are more likely to report understanding psychology concepts and applying these concepts to their own lives, a critical component of psychological literacy. Narvaez and Hill (2010) noted that exposure to multicultural experiences is positively linked to higher moral judgment as measured by the Defining Issues Test-2, a measure reflective of Kohlberg’s moral reasoning scheme (DIT-2, Rest & Narvaez, 1998). The results of Hurtado’s (2005) longitudinal study are particularly interesting, revealing that


245

Â� students who had positive interactions with diverse peers showed enhanced analytical problem-solving skills, cultural awareness, interest in social issues, self-efficacy for social change, perspective-taking skills, interest in poverty issues, concern for the public good, and support for race-based initiatives. Of great importance was the finding that negative interactions with diverse peers resulted in negative outcomes on many of these measures, suggesting that interactions must be carefully constructed and guided by faculty members. Hurtado (2005) reported particularly positive effects for a number of university initiatives, including a diversified curriculum, extracurricular diversity events and activities, and servicelearning (see also Denson & Ing, Chapter 8 in this volume). We offer a number of teaching and professional development activities and practices to promote diversity within the classroom: • In preparing test questions and classroom examples, instructors should use names from various ethnic groups, broaden examples to include gay and lesbian relationships, and generally attend to diversity issues. • When putting together student groups, diversify perspectives by grouping individuals of different ethnic/cultural backgrounds. • In a psychology and law course, a faculty member might include a discussion about the overrepresentation of the Aboriginal population in the Canadian legal system. Discuss a Supreme Court Case identifying bias in the system (e.g., R. v. Gladue, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688). • In covering psychopathology, a teacher can make a point of integrating key information about culture throughout the course, including differences in prevalence rates, stigma, and presentation of symptoms (e.g., somatic presentation of psychological illness tends to be more common among Chinese patients; Parker et al., 2001).

Concluding Thoughts As educators we must be mindful of the missions and goals we set for our academic programs. As psychologists we are in a unique position to consider these desired outcomes as we design curricula and address pedagogical issues (see Dunn, Cautin, & Gurung, Chapter 2 in this volume). As citizens of Canada, it is our duty to use our expertise in human behavior and our position as educators to play a key role in creating a generation of students who are actively engaged with the values of this country and are amply prepared for the challenges ahead. In this chapter we have outlined clear strategies for fostering interest in and an understanding of a number of key values associated with Canada, including volunteerism, publicly funded healthcare, humane approaches to drug use, multiculturalism, and environmental sustainability. Clearly this list is not exhaustive. We challenge educators to consider such global issues in all aspects of pedagogy, from degree programs, course development, class assignments, targeted concepts, relationships with students, and the behavior that you model. To the extent that we can make psychological education

246


immediately and directly relevant to the health of individuals and our nation, we will be successful in our efforts to produce psychologically literate global citizens.

References APA. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf. Astin, A. W. (1989). Moral messages of the university. Educational Record, 70, 22–25. Astin, H. S., & Antonio, A. L. (2000). Building character in college. About Campus, 5, 3–7. AUCC. (2007). Trends in higher education: Volume 1: Enrolment. Retrieved from http:// www.aucc.ca/_pdf/english/publications/trends_2007_vol1_e.pdf. Bewley-Taylor, D., Hallam, C. & Allen, R. (2009). The incarceration of drug offenders: an overview. Retrieved from http://www.idpc.net/php-bin/documents/Beckley_ Report_16_2_FINAL_EN.pdf. Bourdages, J. L. (1997). Sustainable development: conditions, principles and issues. Retrieved from http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/bp458-e.htm. Boyd, D. R. (2003). Unnatural law: rethinking Canadian environmental law and policy. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Boysen, G. A., Vogel, D. L., Cope, M. A., & Hubbard, A. (2009). Incidents of bias in college classrooms: instructor and student perceptions. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2, 219–231. Clayton, S., & Brook, A. (2005). Can psychology help save the world? A model for conservation psychology. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 5, 87–102. Dunn, D. S., Mehrotra, C. M., & Halonen, J. S. (Eds.). (2004). Measuring up: educational assessment challenges and practices for psychology. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Dunn, D. S., McCarthy, M. A., Baker, S., Halonen, J. S., & Hill IV, G. W. (2007). Quality benchmarks in undergraduate psychology programs. American Psychologist, 62, 650–670. Elicker, J. D., Snell, A. F., & O’Malley, A. L. (2010). Do student perceptions of diversity emphasis relate to perceived learning of psychology? Teaching of Psychology, 37, 36–40. Eyler, J., Giles, D., & Schmiede, A. (1996). A practitioner’s guide to reflection in servicelearning. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. Gigerenzer, G., Gaissmaier, W., Kurz-Milcke, E., Schwartz, L. M., & Woloshin, S. (2008). Helping doctors and patients make sense of health statistics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8, 53–96. Hamilton, K., Charlton, S., & Elmes, R. (2008). Developing a four-year baccalaureate degree in applied psychology. Planning for Higher Education, 36, 23–32. Hankins, C. (1997). Needle exchange: panacea or problem? Canadian Medical Association, 157, 275–277. Hart Research Associates (2008). How should colleges assess and improve student learning: employers’ views on the accountability challenge. Retrieved from http://www.aacu. org/leap/documents/2008_Business_Leader_Poll.pdf. Hurtado, S. (2005). The next generation of diversity and intergroup relations research. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 595–610.


247

Koger, S. M., & Scott, B. A. (2007). Psychology and environmental sustainability: a call for integration. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 10–18. Kwantlen Polytechnic University (2010). Bachelor of Applied Arts in Psychology. Retrieved from http://www.kwantlen.ca/calendar/programs/apsych-bc.html. Lynam, D., Milich, R., Zimmerman, R., Novak, S., Logan, T. K., Martin, C. et al. (1999). Project Dare: no effects at 10-year followup. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 590–593. Macdonald, S., & Erickson, P. (1999). Factors associated with attitudes toward harm reduction among judges in Ontario, Canada. International Journal of Drug Policy, 10, 17–24. Martin, K. J., (2010). Student attitudes and the teaching and learning of race, culture and politics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 5-30–539. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. J. . (2010). Psychologically literate citizens In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McKenzie-Mohr, D., & Oskamp, S. (Eds.) (1995). Psychology and the promotion of a sustainable future. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 1–14. Miller, G. A. (1969). Psychology as a means of promoting human welfare. American Psychologist, 24, 1063–1075. Narvaez, D., & Hill, P. L. (2010). The relation of multicultural experiences to moral judgment and mindsets. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 3, 43–55. National Post, Innovative Research Group, & The Dominion Institute. (2005). The CanaÂ� dian values study. Retrieved from www.innovativeresearch.ca/Canadian%20Values% 20Study_Factum%20280905.pdf. Nolte, E., & McKee, C. M. (2008) Measuring the health of nations: updating an earlier analysis. Health Affairs, 27, 58–71. Nutt, D., King, L., Saulsbury, W. & Blakemore, C. (2007). Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse. Lancet, 369, 1047–1053. Parker, G., Cheah, Y. C., & Roy, K. (2001). Do the Chinese somatize depression? A crosscultural study. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 36, 287–293. R. v. Gladue, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688. Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2006). University lecturers’ understanding of sustainability. Higher Education, 51, 105–123. Renn, K. A., & Bilodeau, B. L. (2005). Queer student leaders: An exploratory case study of identity development and LGBT student involvement at a Midwestern research university. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Issues in Education, 2, 49–71. Rest, J. R., & Narvaez, D. (1998). Guide to DIT–2. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Savas, D. (1998). Canadian attitudes towards decriminalizing marijuana use: what surveys show. Retrieved from http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/forum/1998/june/ survey.html. Sciame-Giesecke, S., Roden, D., & Parkison, K. (2009). Infusing diversity into the curriculum: what are faculty members actually doing? Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2, 156–165. Scott, B. A., & Koger, S. M. (2006). Teaching psychology for sustainability: a manual of resources. Retrieved from http://www.teachgreenpsych.com.

248


Simoni, J. M., Sexton-Radek, K., Yescavage, K., Richard, H., & Lundquist, A. (1999). Teaching diversity: experiences and recommendations of American Psychological Association Division 2 members. Teaching of Psychology, 26, 89–95. Smith, D. & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2005). The challenge of diversity: Involvement or alienation in the academy? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Statistics Canada (2003). Canadian community health survey. Retrieved from http:// www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/040615/dq040615b-eng.htm. Statistics Canada (2007). Caring Canadians, Involved Canadians: highlights from the 2007 Canada survey of giving, volunteering and participating. Retrieved from http:// www.statcan.gc.ca/bsolc/olc-cel/olc-cel?catno=71-542-X&lang=eng. Statistics Canada (2008). Police-reported crime statistics. Retrieved from http://www. statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/090721/t090721a3-eng.htm. Tomkovick, C., Lester, C. W., Flunker, L., & Wells, T. A. (2008). Linking collegiate service-learning to future volunteerism: implications for nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 19, 3–26. Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation me: why today’s young Americans are more confident, assertive, entitled—and more miserable than ever before. New York: Free Press. United Nations Development Programme. (2007). Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/ en/site/. United Nations Human Development Programme. (2009). Retrieved from http://hdr. undp.org/en/media/HDR_2009_EN_Complete.pdf. World Health Organization. (2000). World health report. Retrieved from http://www. who.int/whr/2000/en/.

PART FOUR

Integrative Perspectives


18 Adaptive Cognition and Psychological Literacy J ac qu e ly n C ra n n e y a n d S u e M o r r i s

W

e are at a critical point in the development of psychology undergraduate eduÂ�cation. As a young discipline, we have been preoccupied with finding our feet and proving ourselves worthy of being taken seriously among the sciences (Stanovich, 2009). It is time for us to take a qualitative leap into disciplinary adulthood by not only asserting our strengths and acknowledging our limitations, but also taking a leadership role among the disciplines in providing our students with the opportunity to gain the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to contribute significantly to solving behavioral problems in local and global communities (Cranney, 2008). This chapter proposes an integrative approach to undergraduate psychology education that draws upon the concepts of psychological literacy (defined in Chapter 1) and “adaptive cognition.” Adaptive cognition is defined as “global ways of thinking (and consequently behaving) that are beneficial to one’s (and others’) survival and well-being.” The adaptive cognition approach draws on a number of perspectives in psychology, including developmental psychology (by acknowledging the impact of early experiences on current thoughts, feelings, and behavior), evolutionary psychology (by acknowledging the capacities and limitations of the present-day brain given its evolutionary history), cultural psychology (by acknowledging the way in which our current behavior is shaped by culture given its history), and human ecology (by acknowledging the complex interÂ� relationships between Homo sapiens and its biological and physical habitat). B. F. Skinner stated that current behavior is determined by genetics, developmental history, and the current situation (Skinner, 1983, cited in Myers, 2004). The adaptive cognition approach proposes that our current thoughts, feelings, and behavior—that is, our current psychological status—is determined by all of the above factors, as well as our knowledge thereof (metacognition). We are in the privileged position of being able to choose strategies that we know are likely to improve our chances of achieving the goals of living a purposeful and fulfilling life. In doing so, we need to consider how we can also improve the chances of our

252

T h e P s y c h o l o g ica l ly Lit e r at e C iti z e n

fellow human beings achieving the same ends—simply because our past general capacity to adapt and survive as a species has been very much dependent on our social nature. Psychology education is one arena in which this perspective can be shared and experienced, and in which there is potential for a contribution to our students’ survival in response to pressures such as climate change.

Adaptive Cognition The various building blocks of the adaptive cognition approach will first be considered, followed by a discussion of how these different components can be brought together, particularly to inform the “why” of undergraduate psychology education. Then, some strategies to support the “how” of this integrative approach will be suggested.

Developmental Psychology Developmental psychology is part of mainstream psychology (the scientific study of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors), as ontogenetic processes strongly determine a human being’s current thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. A major focus within developmental psychology is the interaction between genetic and environmental factors. Analogously, given a more holistic approach to understanding the current psychological status of a human being, one could argue that to fully understand the genetic determinants of psychological status, one needs to take into account evolutionary history (Fig. 18.1). Similarly, to fully understand the environmental determinants of psychological status, one needs to take into account cultural history and habitat. Within the context of a single human being’s lifetime, developmental factors are clearly extremely important to the determination of current thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, and the different theories of human development need to be taken into consideration when attempting to understand one’s own and others’ behavior (Chickering, 1976; Denson & Ing, Chapter 8 in this volume; Erickson, 1968). It is interesting to speculate within the context of this chapter about the development of two other entities. First, the discipline of psychology: there is no doubt that we are a young discipline. However, perhaps it is time to propel ourselves into adulthood, if we are to facilitate the development of “psychologically literate citizens” (McGovern et al., 2010) in a timely manner. In doing so, we need to fully acknowledge that our discipline overlaps with both biological and social sciences, as well as sharing subject matter with the humanities (P. Gray, 2008). Second, the species itself: in our lifetime, we cannot change the genetic underpinnings of our limited brain. However, perhaps through purposeful programs of education, we can promote the development of more adaptive ways of thinking in our students, and thus society.

Adaptive Cognition and Psychological Literacy

Evolution of brain / genetics

Current biological substrates

253

Developmental history

Evolution of culture / “memes”

Ψ

Current thoughts, emotions, behaviours

Current sociocultural context

FUTURE Figure 18.1â•‡ Our current psychological status (thoughts, emotions, and behaviors) is mediated by current biological substrates and influenced by the current sociocultural context as well as our own personal developmental history. The biological substrates are the result primarily of evolutionary forces, and the current sociocultural context is influenced partly by the evolution of culture. All of these components are influenced by past and present environments (habitats), and all components interact, as symbolized by the all-embracing circle. All components, including our potential awareness of these influences on our current psychological status (part of psychological literacy and adaptive cognition), influence our future.

Evolutionary Psychology Through evolutionary psychology, mainstream psychology interacts with the disciplines of neuroscience (in acknowledging that our brain is the product of a long phylogenetic process) and especially evolutionary biology. “The goal of evolutionary psychology is to study human behavior as the product of evolved psychological mechanisms that depend on internal and environmental input for their development, activation and expression in manifest behavior” (Confer et al., 2010, p. 110). Davis (2009, p. 13) claimed that: an evolutionary approach attempts to understand humans as part of the biological world in which they evolved. Many of those puzzling, irrational behaviors may stem from adaptations made by our ancestors. If so, we are stuck with mental modules that weigh us down in both laughable and dangerous ways. That mental equipment we carry in our modern skulls is over a hundred thousand years out of date. But instead of challenging our limitations and trying to remedy their effects, we create institutions that normalise themâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯. From an evolutionary point of view, we are the descendants of

254


a long line of successful competitors. But times have changed. The Pleistocene Age, when the bulk of human evolution took place, is over, although it left some deep marks on our minds. Essentially, Davis was arguing that many of our ways of thinking were likely adaptive during our evolutionary history, but may not be so adaptive now, particularly in situations where most of our basic needs (e.g., shelter, food), at least in Western societies, have been met. In commenting on the seminal work of Tversky and Kahneman (e.g., Tversky & Kahneman, 1981), Lilienfeld, Ammirati, and Landfield (2009) stated that there is a “growing consensus that human thinking in not nearly as rational as once commonly believedâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯. our judgement and decision-making, although reasonably accurate, are frequently clouded by a plethora of biases and heuristics” (pp. 390–391). They went on to discuss the role of confirmation bias in ideological extremism. Confirmation bias describes the tendency to seek information consistent with pre-existing views and to dismiss information that is inconsistent with pre-existing views; this results in people continuing to maintain views that have been widely discredited. Another example of a bias is spatial optimism, which allows us to believe that issues such as water shortages are problematic in places other than our own (Gifford et al., 2009). A primary feature of our success as a species has been our social nature, which has been transformed though the development of language, and now again through the development of communication technologies. But first, what is the essence of our social nature? Our social behaviors may have evolved as the adaptive advantage of vulnerable neonates and the consequent nurturance requirements co-evolved (Gould, 1977). Parental motivation to protect offspring may be the basis of altruism, the tendency to give up one’s own immediate needs for that of others. The “extended family” evolved into tribes/clans/dynasties, mostly based on family connections, which must have had additional advantages for protecting the young, and also extended the notion of altruism to loyalty to the clan. With this development came the concepts of neighborhoods and local communities. Such communities engaged in coordinated hunting, agriculture, and herding of domesticated animals, which again would have led to increased survival rates for our species. These social developments would have been possible only as a result of the increasing capacity of the brain/mind to inhibit immediate desires to fulfill personal needs, thus allowing compromise and a balance between individual and community needs, mediated by community values—the beginning of “citizenship.” Eventually tribal systems, through warfare or compromise, evolved into national systems, and the concept of “nation-hood” and national citizenship evolved. In essence, we are arguing that parental motivation to protect the young was the beginning of altruism, which is the basis of modern citizenship (Brown & Brown, 2006; Cohen, 1995; Hamilton, 1964; Ward, 2001). One example of a specific social-cognitive mechanism that may have served a protective role in tribal communities is ingroup/outgroup thinking and behavior (Brewer & Brown, 1998). In essence, we tend to favor members of the ingroup and


255

denigrate members of the outgroup. In primitive cultures, particularly where intertribal warfare and sometimes cannibalism were common, this would have been an adaptive mechanism. Its adaptive capacity in Western societies could be questioned, however, and its role in the maintenance of discord (in the form of prejudice and racism) in multicultural societies needs to be fully acknowledged in any attempt to promote tolerance of diversity. Another example of a specific social-cognitive mechanism that may have served to “advance” human communities is social comparison (Festinger, 1954; Turner, 2006), which is the human drive to evaluate oneself, specifically by comparing oneself with others. In other words, it is highly probable that this mechanism is part of our genetic inheritance and has played an adaptive role in our motivation to “better ourselves” in our local communities (even attempting to mimic our heroes and heroines) and to “ensure that our children are better off than we are.” However, it also has some negative consequences in Western societies in the form of, for example, peer pressure toward maladaptive behaviors such as dieting and drug-taking, and peer pressure towards materialism (“keeping up with the Joneses”). Thus, this is another example of an evolved social-cognitive mechanism that may have served us well in the past but has some maladaptive consequences in our current world. In summary, the brain (and thus mind) of the average human is built to focus on present and immediate future needs and has limited capacity to consider the long-term future needs of itself, let alone children and grandchildren. Moreover, it has limited capacity to learn from its own past, let alone the long past of the species and of its habitat. This was not a problem for the species until relatively recently, when it breached its local tribal borders and through technological innovation became the dominant species on Earth, using global resources for today with little thought for tomorrow.

Cultural Psychology Through cultural psychology, mainstream psychology interacts with the disciplines of history, anthropology, geography, cultural studies, and linguistics. CulÂ� tural psychologists study the way in which people are influenced by their culture, where culture is defined as “the shared rules that govern behavior; it is a filter through which we see and understand our reality” (p. 764, Burton, Westen, & Kowalski, 2009). The extent to which cultural psychology is different from the traditional (Western) notion of social psychology is questionable. One might posit that social psychology is the study of the influences of social processes on the way people think, feel, and behave (Allport, 1968), whereas cultural psychology acknowledges the long “evolution” of the specific culture (encapsulating the concept of “memes”) that resulted in that particular social situation (see Fig. 18.1). Cultural psychology also acknowledges that there are both commonalities and differences in social mechanisms across cultures. Cultural (and to a certain extent “social”) psychology increasingly recognizes its long history, from pre–Greco-Roman times through to modern Western

256


cultures, and realizes that such historical accounts often ignore non–Englishspeaking and indigenous cultures. Cultural psychology interacts with evolutionary psychology to the extent that it acknowledges the challenges engendered by the social and technological revolution that has transformed our small group/tribal social situations to our current “flat-world” social situation (Friedman, 2005), whereby the behavior of one group in one part of the world (e.g., the training of a terrorist, the failure of a bank) may have consequences across the globe. Because of this, we now have a need to force cultural and psychological evolution by facilitating the development of “global citizens.”

Human Ecology Through human ecology, mainstream psychology interacts with the disciplines of biology (specifically ecology), geography, and other social sciences. Human ecology is a relatively new transdisciplinary field, and psychology’s contribution involves acknowledging the complex interrelationships between Homo sapiens and its biological and physical habitat. Human ecology views humans as just another species in an ecosystem that contains both animal and plant species in the biosphere, interacting with the lithosphere, hydrosphere, and atmosphere. In relatively recent evolutionary history, our ancestors breached the boundaries of their original habitat in Africa and managed to adapt to almost every part of the planet. Our short-sightedness as a species has led us to consider that the resources of our habitat are ultimately controllable by us, with the additional assumptions of never-ending supply, or our creative capacity to solve resource supply problems. For example, any concerns that the oil supply may not be endless are countered by our claims that we can easily develop alternative energy sources. In the race for profitable energy supply, we do not consider the harm that is being done to our habitat. This reality is exemplified by the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil pipe breakage, which has had immediate, and will have long-term, negative consequences not only for human economies in the immediate area, but also for ecosystems at considerable distances, given the “non-regional” nature of the hydrosphere. Will it be possible to create “global citizens” with an appreciation of these issues, and with the capacity to lead the rest of humankind to treat our habitat with more respect, thus potentially ensuring our long-term survival? In striving to be such citizens, we have much to learn from some “first nations” peoples such as those in America, Australia, Africa, and some Asian countries. Human ecology overlaps with another relatively new subdiscipline of psychology, environmental psychology, which is the scientific study of the interaction between humans and physical environments. It recently has focused on environmental problems that have been caused by human behavior, including climate change. The internationally renowned psychologist and neuroanatomist George Paxinos (1992) has persistently stated that the human brain is the “wrong size.” The human brain is big enough to have invented ways in which, for example,


257

human beings can be transported to the moon and ailing hearts can be replaced, thus allowing some of us to live more exciting or longer lives. However, so far the human brain has been too small to prevent the ongoing destruction (through global warming) of one of the natural wonders of the world, the Great Barrier Reef (S. Gray, 2008). Perhaps the mission of psychology is to accelerate evolution, not by changing the genetics of survival but by “sprucing up the software”—that is, by facilitating the development of metacognitive capacity and ethical attitudes and behavior in our “cognitive elite,” who can then lead the less fortunate others toward sustainable well-being.

An Integrative Approach As already noted, B. F. Skinner stated that current behavior is determined by genetics, developmental history, and the current situation (1983, cited in Myers, 2004). Should our knowledge of the influence of these factors make a difference to this formula? The adaptive cognition approach proposes that our current psychological status is determined by all of those factors—specifically, the influence of our developmental, evolutionary, cultural, and human ecological history and current situation—as well as our knowledge of this confluence of factors (i.e., metacognition; see Fig. 18.1). How can we use this knowledge? That is, what could or should be the consequences of possession of this knowledge? At the very least, it should make us more interesting people to be with—for example, we can talk to our friends with some authority about the nature of human relationships or of our cognitive biases. We could apply this knowledge to gain better employment and a better standard of living. We thus gain better access to healthcare and have more purchasing power—more possessions, more costly entertainment, more educational opportunities for our children. Despite better access to health services and to healthy food, however, are we healthier? Although in general the global life expectancy is increasing (World Health Organization [WHO], 2010a), there are contradictions such as increased health costs and deaths due to lifestyle (i.e., behaviorally determined) diseases such as obesity and smoking (WHO, 2009). Moreover, in Western countries there appears to be an unprecedented increase in mental health problems such as anxiety disorders and depression, with a particularly chilling aspect being significant youth suicide (WHO, 2010b). Why is this happening in countries where young people have increasing access to education, healthcare, and technological innovation? If we are wealthier, why are we not happier? Classic U.S. research on life satisfaction (Diener & Seligman, 2004) indicates that despite increases in relative income over the past few decades, people are not happier. Why are we not happier; what else are we looking for in our lives? The field of happiness research has recently morphed into the positive psychology movement (e.g., Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), which constitutes a paradigm shift from the traditional focus on psychological dysfunction emanating from the post-World War II era, to the human optimization approach (which

258


draws on the work of Maslow and Rogers), and can be traced back to Socrates’ notion that self-knowledge is the path to happiness. One could argue that the positive psychology movement could only have originated in the United States, where the 1776 Declaration of Independence states that a right to happiness is an inalienable right. Unfortunately the political and economic systems of democracy and capitalism appear to have fallen short of delivering that “right.” As most proponents clearly state, positive psychology is not about “being happy and experiencing no negative emotions.” Rather, like the evolutionarily adaptive consequences of negative emotions such as fear that normally serve threat-avoidance functions, positive emotions also lead to adaptive self-preserving or goal-directed behaviors (e.g., Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004). For example, Fredrickson’s (1998) “broaden-and-build” theory asserts that positive emotions allow us to build our personal resources, which help us to adaptively solve problems to reach our goals. Fredrickson also relates this approach to the increasingly popular research area of resilience (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004). Taking a slightly different approach, Lyubormirsky, Sheldon, and Schkade (2005) proposed that chronic happiness level is determined by three factors: set point (genetically determined), life circumstances (incidents beyond our control), and “intentional activity” (which is within our control). Their research has demonstrated that positive psychology interventions, whereby people intentionally engage in various activities such as writing letters of gratitude, helping others, and recording positive experiences each day, lead to long-term increases in physical and mental wellbeing (see, e.g., Peterson, 2006). Are we in the West “discovering” an approach to thinking about ourselves and our world that has long been known in some Eastern cultures, for example the beneficial effects of mindfulness meditation in Buddhist practices (e.g., Fredrickson, Cohn, Coffey, Pek, & Finkel, 2008)? It may be fruitful to align the various movements toward individual and societal well-being (e.g., Kabat-Zinn, 1990) and to acknowledge the contextual factors that may limit the success of some Western positivity practices in certain cultures, for example those characterized by extreme poverty and lack of access to health and education. Adaptive cognition overlaps conceptually with positive psychology and advocates the use of intentional positivity strategies. However, it takes a broader approach to adaptive behavior, emphasizing adaptive goal seeking not only at the individual level but also at the species level, thus taking a longer and broader evolutionary, cultural, and ecological perspective (see Fig. 18.1). The adaptive cognition approach also emphases the notion that our success as a species is based on our capacity to extend our adaptive social networks beyond family to all human beings. A note of caution, however: in Western societies, most of us are in the privileged position of being able to choose to use strategies that we know will improve our chances of achieving the goals of living a purposeful and fulfilling life (for example, Sternberg, 2009). We need to acknowledge and be alert to two realities in our personal, professional, and leadership roles: (a) not all people in our society and in other societies are in such privileged positions, and (b) there will be some people who will never be able to benefit from this approach, for various


259

reasons. Nevertheless, in adopting the adaptive cognition approach, we need to constantly consider how we, as well as our fellow human beings, can achieve the goal of living a purposeful and meaningful life. In summary, adaptive cognition involves “seeing the big picture,” in the long term, from an evolutionary perspective (see Fig. 18.1). As such, the concept overlaps to a large extent with the concept of psychological literacy, and importantly has “moral” consequences—that is, a primary assumption underlying the approach is that we need to look after other members of our species, as well as ourselves, for the species to survive in the long term. Thus the notion of “citizenship” is relevant, particularly “global citizenship” (Marshall, 2010), with the psychological version being the “psychologically literate citizen” (McGovern et al., 2010). In thinking about the development of psychological literacy (PL) from the perspective of adaptive cognition, one might distinguish three levels (Fig. 18.2): • Level 1 PL: Purposefully applying psychological principles in a way that is adaptive (i.e., planning and solving problems to meet needs/

3. Global perspectives 2. Local communities

1. Self & immediate others

Figure 18.2â•‡ The different levels of psychological literacy (PL) development in the context of the adaptive cognition approach. Level 1 focuses on application of psychological principles adaptively to oneself and one’s immediate set of family members and friends. Level 2 focuses on application of psychological principles in a way that is adaptive for one’s local community. Level 3 focuses on applying psychological principles in local, national, or global contexts, in a way that reflects an awareness of global issues, and where it is highly likely that one would need to play a leadership role. Development at the different levels may interact, as indicated by two-way arrows. Undergraduate psychology education should provide opportunities for students to develop PL at all three levels, but with an emphasis on Level 1, as often students take an introductory psychology unit, for example, in the hope of gaining better self-understanding.

260


goals) for oneself and one’s immediate set of family members and friends (see McGovern et al., 2010, Case Study 1). • Level 2 PL: Purposefully applying psychological principles in a way that is adaptive for one’s local community (e.g., employment setting, school, recreation club). One may need to play a leadership role at this level. • Level 3 PL: Purposefully applying psychological principles in a way that is adaptive at a level that may reach beyond one’s local community (e.g., creating behavioral change strategies to improve health outcomes that can be implemented in a number of communities, and perhaps globally; see McGovern et al., 2010, Case Study 2). It is highly likely that one would need to play a leadership role at this level (see Cranney et al., 2008). It is not necessarily the case that one needs to develop Level 1 PL fully before moving on to Level 2, and so on. For example, it may be that one finds oneself in a leadership role at Level 2, which leads to an increase in Level 1 PL. MoreÂ� over, a certain individual may be applying certain psychological principles at Level 2, and others only at Level 1. However, we are proposing that development of Level 1 PL may be necessary for optimal development of Level 2 PL, and so on.

Undergraduate Education: A Call to Action Psychological Literacy and Adaptive Cognition: the Pedagogical Approach What happens to the majority of psychology majors, at least in Australia, Britain, and the United States, who do not become professional psychologists? In Australia and Britain, where an accredited psychology undergraduate degree is the primary (if not the only) pathway to professional psychology training, it is possible that many such graduates are disenfranchised with psychology, either because they have not “made the grade” to graduate training or because their expectations about psychology have not been met (Over, 1983). In the United States this is less likely to be the case, because (a) the psychology major serves the highly valued tradition of a liberal arts and sciences undergraduate education (McGovern et al., 2010); (b) there are other pathways to professional training; and (c) it is well recognized that there are few places for the required doctoral training for professional psychology. Regardless of these differences in educational systems, it is interesting to speculate about what entering students may want from their psychology major. It is likely that most expect that their psychology education would provide opportunities (a) to learn more about themselves and their immediate others (e.g., family, friends, coworkers), and perhaps also (b) to apply psychological principles to achieve their personal and professional goals. This is what we


261

have termed above “Level 1 PL.” What might be needed to increase the probability of these opportunities being made available in the undergraduate curriculum? We will provide some ideas below. Beyond the students, one might also ask, what does the discipline want? The discipline is usually represented by the named university departments, and it is evident that the primary aims of such departments are to (a) create knowledge through faculty research and indirectly through research training, and (b) train professional psychologists (we momentarily ignore, for the sake of argument, the many excellent liberal arts colleges whose primary mission is undergraduate education). Most university departments of psychology meet these two aims very well. A continuing complaint of faculty from these university departments, however, is the misunderstanding by the public (including granting bodies and university administrators) of the discipline and profession of psychology (Badcock, Hammond, Gillam, Brewer, & Andrews, 2007). How might we address this issue? One obvious answer is to help our undergraduate psychology major (and first-year) students to become better “ambassadors” for psychology—to “spread the good word” about how useful psychology can be in solving problems related to human behavior (see, e.g., Klatzky, 2009). For this, they will need to have developed at least Level 1 PL, and for even better “demystifying” of the general public, Level 2 PL. This approach could also be facilitated by the creation of educational pathways (e.g., double majors) that allow education in psychology to be combined with other employment-relevant fields, such as education, criminology, human resources, medicine, and neuroscience. However, educational strategies may be necessary to increase the transdisciplinary learning by, for example, having a final-semester capstone unit that explicitly requires students to integrate knowledge from the two areas. Beyond the ivory tower, what might the world want? We propose that our habitat needs psychology graduates who can help to solve current (and projected future) local and global problems, many of which relate to human behavior (Marsella, 2007). How can educators meet this proposed need? Essentially we should endeavor to provide our students with opportunities to develop Level 3 PL, to become what McGovern and colleagues (2010) called “psychologically literate citizens,” and from a transdisciplinary perspective, better “global citizens” (Marshall, 2010). It could also be argued, given Figure 18.1, that Level 3 PL involves an appreciation of the strengths and limitations of psychology, relative to other disciplines and professions, in solving human problems. These different needs and wants are not incompatible: with some rethinking of the aims of undergraduate psychology education, and some sharing of existÂ� ing innovative and economical learning and teaching practices, it should be possible to afford students many opportunities to (a) develop psychological literacy, which includes knowledge, research methodology, critical thinking, values (including professional dispositions), communication, and application of psychology, (b) increase their employability by making explicit how their knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions can be applied in work settings (Upton & Trapp, 2010), and possibly also (c) develop some low-level professional knowledge and skills in preparation for

262


a variety of careers, including professional psychology. The importance of facilitating the development of graduates who can use their psychological literacy for the “greater good,” however, cannot be overemphasized.

Overall Curriculum Approaches If the purpose of undergraduate psychology education is to facilitate the development of adaptive cognition in our students, then we need to shape the curriculum to afford such opportunities (cf., Dunn, Cautin, & Gurung, Chapter 2 in this volume; Dunn et al., 2010). Some might argue that the curriculum is already packed with the required “knowledge” and “research methods” content, and there is little room to expand on “critical thinking” (such as practice in recognizing our cognitive biases), “values” (including ethics), “communication,” and “application” of psychology, beyond the minimal components required through processes such as accreditation (e.g., the capacity to write research reports). However, we would argue that it is possible to shape the curriculum to increase the acquisition of psychological literacy from the perspective of adaptive cognition without losing the essence of “content” in the form of knowledge and research methods. Psychological literacy does require knowledge, and an appreciation of how that knowledge was gained (through the scientific method), before it can be applied in a values-driven way to psychological issues. We propose that throughout the curriculum, the development of graduate attributes (learning outcomes) emphasize application (Cranney et al., Chapter 11 in this volume), with an explicit developmental sequence from knowledge of self (Wilson, 2009), to knowledge of others and interpersonal relationships, to knowledge of systems, organizations, and cultures (see Fig. 18.2). In other words, the development of psychological literacy is explicitly build upon and into compulsory core units in psychology, with a whole-of-program approach (e.g., the use of graduate attribute portfolios across the program, and a capstone course) leading to the greatest development of psychological literacy. In particular, from the very first unit in psychology, the expected learning outcomes of the unit and of the degree program, as well as the implications for employability, can be made explicit through the use of attribute portfolios and realistic employment-relevant activities (e.g., Cranney et al., 2005). Attribute portfolios should be structured in such a way that students are required to reflect on what they already know, what they are acquiring from their learning in that unit, how this affects life outside the course, what else they need to accomplish, and what plans are needed to achieve that. This initiates a cycle of intentional reflection regarding both their learning during their program of study and its application outside the classroom. To further facilitate this process, it would be desirable if each psychology unit thereafter could include at least a small assessable activity that leads to the further development of the attribute portfolio. In the final year of the psychology major, emphasis on this activity should be increased, with an optimal approach being a compulsory unit with some formal training


263

and perhaps a work-integrated learning experience that serves to integrate the various attributes in an applied sense, thus leading to the students’ explicit appreciation of their level of psychological literacy (e.g., a report on how psychological theory was relevant to explaining the effectiveness of an intervention following a needs analysis in a work setting). This kind of experience is also likely to increase a student’s employability, and may involve some low-level, low-cost skill training (e.g., interviewing techniques) that would be relevant to many different human service professions, including professional psychology. Finally, well-structured group work with a superordinate goal, either within a unit or through an extracurricular outreach program (such as organizing and implementing tutoring in a local high school for at-risk students), could not only help with the development of interpersonal skills with diverse group members and “clients,” but should also contribute to the development of global citizenship capacity.

Some Specific Learning & Teaching Strategies Many of the specific learning and teaching strategies mentioned in other chapters in this volume could be classified as taking an adaptive cognition approach. Some strategies we have employed with our first-year students are briefly described below.

Self-Knowledge Through Inventories There are now many reasonable Web-based inventories that give automatic feedback to students and thus allow them to compare themselves to others in terms of various personality traits, values, and so on. For example, Seligman’s “Authentic Happiness” website has the Brief Strengths Test (see http://www. authentichappiness.sas.upenn.edu/Default.aspx). Students can be told to take this test by themselves, then either reflect on the outcome in a journal or discuss the characteristics of the test, and their outcomes, in a tutorial. They need to be told that they do not have to discuss any aspect of the outcome publicly if they choose not to. A subsequent homework exercise of building on a chosen strength, can be an empowering experience for students.

Study Strategies A handout (available from the authors) is given to students in a tutorial class, and the instructor briefly discusses the content, which consists of seven different strategies or approaches to increasing the effectiveness of studying. These evidence-based strategies are (1) Time on task, organizational and time management skills, study environment; (2) desirable difficulties and positive attitudes toward study; (3) improve the quality of your study time; (4) space your learning;

264


(5) improve your general cognitive skills; (6) improve your specific academic skills; and (7) deal with barriers and keep healthy. Students are then asked to form pairs for the next three weeks. In their pair, they are asked to discuss which strategy they will try out over the next week, and they are to report back on their experiences—for example, on the impact of the strategy—to their partner in the next tutorial. In the following week’s tutorial, that discussion ensues, and again, they choose a strategy (same or different) to try the next week. At the end of three weeks, they are required to give ratings of the effectiveness of the overall approach, and are also asked specific questions about the approach in a short journal entry, which is assessable. They are told of these requirements at the beginning of this exercise so that there is an extrinsic reason for them to focus on the activity, the medium-term effectiveness of which could then be assessed in a final unit evaluation.

Positive Psychology Strategies This approach is similar to the study strategies above, except that it contains six well-researched positivity strategies (again, available from the authors). These evidence-based strategies are (1) three blessings; (2) the gratitude letter; (3) control negative thoughts; (4) active and constructive responding; (5) do good things; and (6) using your strengths in new ways.

Conclusions If we take our role as educators seriously, then we need to re-examine the goals of undergraduate psychology education (Halpern, 2010). This chapter presents a novel integration of different fields of psychology in the construction of a mature understanding of the potential of the discipline in the form of adaptive cognition. Adaptive cognition provides the pedagogical imperative for educators to provide explicit opportunities for students to develop psychological literacy within our curriculum. As we continue to make explicit the proposed benefit of psycholoÂ� gical literacy to the student, to their community, and to the world at large, we anticipate the discipline of psychology becoming more popular in its appeal, as its potential to have a beneficial global impact is increasingly recognized. It is the authors’ wish that as educators and students respond to this call for action, this proposed approach will be shaped across time and adapted across different spaces to optimize the well-being of students and their communities into the future. The aim of education is not only to prepare students for productive careers, but also to enable them to live lives of dignity and purpose; not only to generate new knowledge, but to channel that knowledge to humane ends; not merely to study government, but to help shape a citizenry that can promote the public good. Thus, higher education’s vision must be widened if the


265

nation is to be rescued from problems that threaten to diminish permanently the quality of life. (Boyer, 1990, pp. 77–78)

Acknowledgments We would like to thank Dana Dunn and Sonny Li for their comments on this chapter; Fiona McDonald for assistance with the chapter; all of our students and colleagues who contributed to our thinking over the past several years; and the Australian Learning and Teaching Council for funding, which gave us more time to think about the aims of undergraduate psychology education. (The views expressed in this chapter do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd.)

References Allport, G. (1968). The historical background of modern social psychology. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 3–56). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Badcock, D. R., Hammond, G. R., Gillam, B., Brewer, N., & Andrews, S. (2007). Psychology: the science of mind, brain, and behaviour. Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies Occasional Paper Series. Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Brewer, M. B., & Brown, R. J. (1998). Intergroup relations. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vols. 1 & 2, pp. 554–594). New York: McGraw-Hill. Brown, S. L., & Brown, R. M. (2006). Selective investment theory: recasting the functional significance of close relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 17, 1–29. Burton, L., Westen, D., & Kowalski, R. (2009). Psychology (2nd ed.). Milton, Queensland: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. Chickering, A. W. (1976). Developmental change as a major outcome. In M. T. Keeton et al. (Eds.), Experiential learning: rationale, characteristics, and assessment (pp. 62–107). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cohen, R. (1995). Altruism and the evolution of civil society. In P. M. Oliner, M. Z. Smolenska, S. P. Oliner, & L. Baron (Eds.), Embracing the other: philosopical, psychological and historical perspectives on altruism (pp. 104–129). New York: New York University Press. Confer, J. C., Easton, J. A., Fleischman, D. S., Goetz, C. D., Lewis, D. M. G., Perilloux, C., et al. (2010). Evolutionary psychology: controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations. American Psychologist, 65, 110–126. Cranney, J. (2008). Sustainable and evidence-based learning and teaching approaches to the undergraduate psychology curriculum. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Available from http://www.altc.edu.au/resource-sustainable-evidence-based-learningpsychology-unsw-2008.

266


Cranney, J., Kofod, M., Huon, G., Jensen, L., Levin, K., McAlpine, I., et al. (2005). Portfolio tools: learning and teaching strategies to facilitate development of graduate attributes. Proceedings of the Blended Learning in Science Teaching and Learning Symposium, September 30, 2005, University of Sydney. Sydney: Universe Science. Cranney, J., Provost, S., Katsikitis, M., Martin, F., White, F., & Cohen, L. (2008). Designing a diverse, future-oriented vision for undergraduate psychology in Australia: final investigation report. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Available from http://www.altc.edu.au/carrick/webdav/site/carricksite/users/siteadmin/public/ grants_project_psychology_report_aug08.pdf. Davis, H. (2009). Caveman logic: the persistence of primitive thinking in a modern world. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Beyond money: toward an economy of wellbeing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 1–31. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: youth in crisis. New York: W. W. Norton. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General PsyÂ� chology, 2, 300–319. Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A. Coffey, K. A., Pek. J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives: positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1045–1062. Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: a brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Gifford, R., Scannell, L., Kormos, C. Smolova, L., Biel, A., Boncu, S., et al. (2009). Temporal pessimism and spatial optimism in environmental assessments: an 18-nation study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 1–12. Gould, S. J. (1977). Ever since Darwin: reflections in natural history. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Gray, P. (2008). The value of Psychology 101 in liberal arts education: a psychocentric theory of the university. Observer, 21(9), 29–32. Gray, S. (2008, September 1). Great Barrier Reef gone in 30 years if no change, says scientist. Courier Mail. Retrieved Nov. 9, 2008, from http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24275276–5012321,00.html. Halpern, D. (Ed.) (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour I. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1–16. Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain and illness. New York: Dell. Klatzky, R. L. (2009). Giving psychological science away: the role of applications courses. Perspective on Psychological Science, 4, 522–530.


267

Lilienfeld, S. O., Ammirati, R., & Landfield, K. (2009). Giving debiasing away: can psychological research on correcting cognitive errors promote human welfare? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 390–398. Lyuborminsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness: the architecture of sustainable charge. Review of General Psychology, 9, 111–131. Marsella, A.J. (2007). Education and training for a global psychology: foundations, issues, and actions. In M. J. Stevens & U. P. Gielen (Eds.), Toward a global psychology: research, intervention, and pedagogy (pp. 333–361). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Marshall, S. (2010). The University of New South Wales Graduate Attributes Framework. UNSW Academic Board Document (Aug. 3, 2010). McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E., Jr., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., et al. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–28). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Myers, D. (2004). Psychology (7th ed.). Michigan: Worth Publishers. Over, R. (1983). Training and career preferences of undergraduates majoring in psychology. Australian Psychologist, 18, 377–384. Paxinos, G. (1992). Is the brain the right “size” for the solution of the environmental problem? In R. Harding (Ed.), Ecopolitics V Proceedings, Centre for Liberal and General Studies, University of New South Wales, 446–452. Peterson, C. (2006). A primer of positive psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: an introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14. Stanovich, K. (2009). How to think straight about psychology (9th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Sternberg, R. J. (2009). The theory of successful intelligence. In J. C. Kaufman, E. L. Grigorenko, & R. J. Sternberg (eds.), The essential Sternberg: essays on intelligence, psychology, and education (pp. 71–100). New York: Springer Publishing Co. Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emotions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 320–333. Turner, J. C. (2006). Social comparison and social identity: some prospects for intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 1–34. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choices. Science, 211, 453–458. Upton, D., & Trapp, A. (2010). Psychology: past, present and future. In D. Upton & A. Trapp (eds.), Teaching psychology in higher education. Chichester, West Sussex: BPS Blackwell. Ward, R. A. (2001). Linkages between family and society-level intergenerational attitudes. Research on Aging, 23, 179–208. Wilson, T. D. (2009). Know thyself. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 384–388. World Health Organization (2009). Global health risks: mortality and burden of disease attributable to selected major risks. Geneva: WHO Press. Retrieved July 19, 2010, from www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/global_health_risks/en/ index.html.

268


World Health Organization (2010a). Life expectancy at birth. Retrieved July 19, 2010, from http://www.who.int/gho/mortality_burden_disease/life_tables/situation_ trends_life_expectancy/en/index.html. World Health Organization (2010b). Suicide prevention. Retrieved July 19, 2010, from http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suicideprevent/en/index.html.

19 Psychological Literacy Bridging Citizenship and Character B r y a n W. S o k o l a n d J a n e t E . K u e b l i

I

n the 1960s, Jean Piaget called it the “American Question” (Dean & Youniss, 1991). After years of research exploring the complexities of children’s cognitive growth and the formulation of his now-famous “stages” of intellectual development, Americans, and particularly American educators, had to know: “Can we speed up children’s cognitive development?” Like the race to land humans on the moon, develop an invincible nuclear arsenal, or set the bar for economic competitiveness on the global stage, American educators found themselves racing to answer the common question: “How can we get children to meet the developmental milestones of each stage more quickly and more efficiently?” Debate on this and other similar questions about “cognitive readiness” or “age-appropriate curricula” or “enriched educational environments” is far from over. And, at least in present-day higher education circles, the current iteration of this enduring question has become: “Can colleges and universities speed up the traditional four-year degree program, and teach students what they need to know in just three years?” (Schneider, 2010; Strauss, 2009). Our aim in the present chapter has less to do with providing answers for all these questions and more to do with the contentious, and potentially dangerous, issue of efficiency in higher education, particularly as it relates to efforts of psychology instructors and professors to promote the constitutive skills of “psychological literacy” (McGovern et al., 2010). Although identification of these skills presents a complicated task, after reviewing efforts of disciplinary governing bodies from around the world (e.g., the American Psychological Association, European Federation of Psychologists’ Association, and the Australian Psychology Accreditation Council), McGovern and his colleagues (2010) have begun to make significant progress in distilling and listing many of them. This list ranges from skills specific to the discipline of psychology, such as basic fluency in the subject matter and “applying psychological principles to personal, social, and organizational issues in work, relationships, and the broader community” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 11), to more

270

T he P sycholog i cally L i te r ate C i t i z e n

general scholarly and practical abilities, such as being an effective communicator and creative problem-solver and “being competent in using and evaluating information and technology” (p. 11). These latter skills, in particular, have much in common with notions of critical thinking, or what Halpern (1996) has described as thoughts that are “purposeful, reasoned, and goal-directed—the kinds of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions when the thinker is using skills that are thoughtful and effective for the particular context and type of thinking task” (p. 5). There is a great deal of merit in this description of critical thinking, just as there are many benefits to identifying and compressing a formal list of skills associated with psychological literacy. Still, there are also dangers that lurk behind these efforts, not the least of which is Halpern’s (1996) caveat that “dividing the thinking process, which is fluid and continuous, into discrete skills is somewhat artificial” (p. 32). There can be little doubt that this is true, but the more real danger, or so we will argue, concerns the tendency, often reinforced by these listing exercises, to inadvertently promote purely instrumental forms of reasoning in students. In other words, the good-intentioned efforts of professional educators and university faculty members to identify the core elements of psychological literacy (or any other form of literacy, for that matter) have the potential to backfire if students learn only the most efficient ways to think within and about a discipline. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1947), once put the issue this way: Education must enable one to sift and weigh evidence, to discern the true from the false, the real from the unreal, and the facts from the fiction. The function of education, therefore, is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically. But education which stops with efficiency may prove the greatest menace to society. The most dangerous criminal may be the man gifted with reason, but with no moralsâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯.â•¯We must remember that intelligence is not enough. Intelligence plus character—that is the goal of true education. MLK’s warning has become the rallying cry for contemporary character educators around the globe (Sokol, Hammond, & Berkowitz, 2010). His concerns about “stopping with efficiency” is perhaps why McGovern and colleagues (2010) and others in the discipline are quick to include “acting ethically” (p. 11) among the skills contributing to psychological literacy. But McGovern and colleagues (2010) do not stop there. They also highlight ethics and social responsibility—or what others (e.g., Althof & Berkowitz, 2006; Lickona & Davidson, 2005; Peterson & Seligman, 2004) might call “character”—in their notion of “psychologically literate citizens.” Based on this notion of citizenship within and beyond the discipline, they argue that psychology instructors must encourage students to contribute to “a rich narrative being composed in global higher education about psychologists’ social responsibilities and commitments” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 20). In the narrative that follows, we hope to show why the addition of “citizens” to the construct of psychological literacy cannot simply be understood as a mere, post hoc addition to McGovern and colleagues’ important efforts. To make our point


271

clearer, we will draw from parallel efforts in the field of character education to also promote literate, but socially responsible, citizens (Althof & Berkowitz, 2006; Berkowitz, Althof, Turner, & Bloch, 2008).

Worthy Ends: Citizens and Moral Character Contributors to the character education literature are no less guilty than proponents of psychological literacy of compiling lists to better define the content area. In character education circles, these lists tend to emphasize positive personality traits or virtues, such as being courageous, honest, truthful, tolerant, or fair. As a result, educational programs designed to promote character have typically focused on classroom practices that effectively inculcate some list of traits (e.g., the “Six Pillars” of Character Counts). These virtues or traits are typically thought to be sufficient to impress moral character on an individual regardless of social or psychological circumstance (e.g., Ryan, 1989, 1996). In contrast to this trait-oriented view, recent efforts have emerged that attempt to “psychologize” character (e.g., Berkowitz, 1997; Blasi, 2005; Narvaez & Lapsley, 2005; Nucci, 2001). These more process-oriented, psychological approaches tend to frame character as an interrelated set of psychosocial processes operating as an evolving system that manifests “in the predictable social, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral patterns that emerge over the course ofâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯.â•¯development” (Sokol, Hammond, & Berkowitz, 2010, p. 583). According to this view, the system of processes and subsequent skills most relevant to character development include self- and emotion regulation, perspective taking, moral reasoning, and identity formation (Sokol, Hammond, & Berkowitz, 2010). If simply comparing lists were all that needed to be done to show connections between character and psychological literacy, then the obvious point of convergence would begin, and perhaps even end, with “acting ethically.” What a psychologized approach to character allows, however, is a more substantive comparison, one that shows how the potential convergences between character and psychological literacy run even deeper. In particular, by understanding character as a developing system, there are other important parallels that emerge and perhaps even shed new light on the system of skills contributing to psychological literacy, and especially psychoÂ� logically literate citizens. An individual who is said to possess good, moral character, for instance, displays skills that integrate a range of psychological processes. In other words, good character is the result of properly aligned self-regulatory, perspective-taking, and moral reasoning abilities (to name only some of the more important) that operate together in a complementary and integrated fashion. The same could be said for the psychologically literate citizen whose various skills are not only understood to align properly for success within the discipline but are also integrated with broader concerns that extend to “their families, their colleagues, their communities, and to the larger society, state, nation, or world” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 20). Understanding how the skills related to character and psychological literacy may align in systematic ways, however, also points to a critical question: What accounts

272


for the alignments or systematic patterns that produce good character and socially responsible forms of psychological literacy (i.e., psychologically literate citizens)? Or, as McGovern and colleagues (2010) remark, “Although psychological literacy remains an admirable goal, focusing only on the literacy aspect is shortchanging its powerful effects” (p. 24). How, then, can we “cash in” on its full effects? In the field of character development, these questions are closely tied to a distinction that has been drawn between performance character and moral character (Lickona & Davidson, 2005). The skills that are often seen to make up performance character include many of the same that Halpern (1996) associates with critical thinking, such as evaluating information, formulating inferences, and predicting outcomes. Beyond these more intellectual skills, others (e.g., Character Education Partnership, 2008; Narvaez & Lapsley, 2005) have added building self-awareness and self-monitoring abilities, staying attuned to the social context, appreciating other points of view, managing emotions, persevering in challenging situations, responding to feedback, and developing resilience. All of these skills or abilities, in one way or another, enable and enhance successful performance of some kind. They allow individuals to optimally monitor and regulate their thoughts and actions, exert effort and self-control, and eventually reach levels of personal excellence in some area of conduct, whether it be achieving one’s “personal best” in a running or bicycle race, or meeting one’s goals for a successful grade on an exam. Without disputing the value of achieving personal excellence, what is important to recognize about performance-related skills is that they operate like tools: they help construct the end product (i.e., they are means to an end) without determining or dictating what the product will be. Monitoring and regulating one’s emotions, for instance, is a skill that may be equally applied to robbing a bank as marching in a peace rally. Instrumental skills, such as these, are sometimes said to be “necessary but not sufficient” (Walker, 1980, 1988) for achieving moral character. They are value-neutral in a way that moral character clearly is not. Moral character, then, refers directly to interpersonal ethical imperatives such as justice or compassion. Such imperatives, or social prescriptions, are understood as intrinsically good as opposed to merely “derivative of the ends toward which they are applied (e.g., courageous in the service of saving innocent lives or courageous in fulfilling a violent gang initiation)” (Berkowitz & Puka, 2009, p. 108, italics added). The intrinsic value or worth of moral character is what sets constraints and guides the more instrumental function of performance-related skills and goals. As Davidson, Khmelkov, and Lickona (2010) have argued: “Without moral character, we can easily fall into using unethical means to achieve our performance goals” (p. 431). Or, returning again to MLK’s (1947) sentiments regarding the goals of education, teachers must nurture “not only the power of concentration [or efficient thinking skills], but worthy objectives upon which to concentrate.” Moral character is the end, or worthy objective in this case, whereas performance character provides the means. The question, then, of what accounts for the systematic alignments or orgÂ� anizational qualities that ultimately generate both good character and socially


273

responsible, psychologically literate citizens points to the following answer: the prescriptive goal—the worthy end—of building ethical relationships with others, or of creating citizens who sustain their community by engaging in ethical conduct. Citizenship, in short, is the key to this argument. It is the organizational principle that holds all the pieces—whether these are the skills related to character or psychological literacy—together as one. In other words, without “citizenship” there would be little to prevent a list like that of McGovern and colleagues from becoming mere performance-related skills that hold only instrumental value to their users. Without “citizenship,” nothing would prevent these skills from operating as tools that may be deployed as easily for selfish gain as building an ethical community of scholars and practitioners. Citizenship is the worthy end, but, as we hope to show next, it is also the beginning.

Worthy Beginnings: Community and Cultivating Justice In C. S. Lewis’ (1944) lecture series on modern educational practice, now published as The Abolition of Man, he argued for the preservation of “First Principles”— or what he variously called a natural moral order or Tao—as the only means by which to prevent the self-destructive tendencies of purely instrumental forms of reasoning. In this spirit, he is credited with saying: “Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil” (see Manser, 2001, p. 87). Lewis’ cautionary words, here, bear a strong resemblance to MLK’s warnings that the “man gifted with reason, but no morals” could easily prove to be a “dangerous criminal.” Not coincidentally, Lewis and MLK shared similar visions (and concerns) about education, but some of Lewis’ insights deserve Â�further elaboration. Adopting a more classical conception of intelligence and rationality as his starting point, Lewis claimed that the pre-modern infatuation with magical endeavors and our modern faith in science are like twins “born of the same impulse” (Lewis, 1944, p. 76). He argued, in particular, that: There is something which unites magic and applied science while separating both from the ‘wisdom’ of earlier ages. For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to reality, and the Â�solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men. (p. 77) Subduing reality, as he says, involves a “technique” that is devoid of value, or rather, valuable only insofar as it functions to control or manipulate the world and others. Although obviously useful, the technical skills that emerge, if left unchecked, yield practices “ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious” (Lewis, 1944, p. 77).

274


On the other hand, the “cardinal problem” of old, to which Lewis also refers, is an acknowledgment of Aristotle’s classical conception of intelligence and a vague reference to his notion of nous. Character educators, as it happens, also share a special fondness for Aristotle (e.g., Higgins-D’Alessandro & Power, 2005), although more often to comment on the connection between habit and virtue (e.g., Wynne, 1986) than to draw out the implications of nous for contemporary views of character. Nous refers to the part of human rationality that participates in the natural order of the universe (Aristotle, 1985), or as psychology historian, Kurt Danziger (1997), has described, “the fundamental principles according to which the world was constructed” (p. 27). In contrast to a more instrumental form of human intelligence, or what Aristotle equated with cleverness (dienotes), nous holds intrinsic value by virtue of its participation in the natural moral order. Importantly, nous also provides the structure, or order, that constrains and guides the more instrumental inclinations of human intelligence. In the language of C. S. Lewis, it is what prevents sheer cleverness from becoming utter devilishness. Unlike Lewis, whose ethical arguments were part and parcel of his spiritual beliefs, we will remain agnostic about the question of whether individuals require a metaphysical, or otherwise cosmic, order in which to participate to provide an ethical grounding for their conduct. Nevertheless, we do advocate for the need to participate in some kind of order, or to be engaged citizens as we suggested in the previous section, as a way to account for the alignments or systematic patterns that distinguish between skills serving only instrumental purposes from those providing the “sufficient” conditions for ethical relations with others. Our sentiments in this regard, like others interested in character development, have affinities with a more classical, or Aristotelian, view of ethical life, particularly as it involves participation in a community with norms of justice, trust, and collective responsibility. The idea of a “just community,” especially in contemporary circles of moral and character education, is less commonly associated with Aristotle’s name than with renowned moral psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg (1968; see also, Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989a). Despite Kohlberg’s initial misgivings for virtue-based views of morality like Aristotle’s, he and his colleagues (e.g. Power, Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989b; Higgins-D’Alessandro & Power, 2005) eventually showed how various insights from classical conceptions of ethics could be integrated with their own approach to moral education. This is no more evident than in their work to develop an educational model that builds “just communities” within schools. According to Power (2008), just communities refer “to a group-oriented educational approach that employs democratic processes of governance to foster a culture of community” (p. 239). The history and details of this approach are rich with ideas for developing educational communities that promote critical thinking and moral accountability. For our purposes here, though, it is the distinction that Kohlberg’s colleagues (i.e., Power & Higgins-D’Alessandro, 2008; see also Sandel, 1982) have drawn between instrumental and constitutive communal structures that proves the most important.


275

Associations of people joined by a common purpose, but having otherwise little else in common, tend to operate as instrumental communities. Such associations place emphasis on “getting the job done” over fostering a sense of belonging or concern for the welfare of other members in the group. In contrast, constitutive communities contribute to members’ sense of identity and well-being. Members of constitutive communities “are not only committed to common ends, but are intersubjectively connectedâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯.â•¯[they] hold their norms and values as a united ‘we’ and not simply as a collection of separate egos” (Power & Higgins-D’Alessandro, 2008, p. 234). By emphasizing the relationships that exist between group members, as opposed to simply the ends or goals that form their purpose, a constitutive community establishes the interpersonal conditions that make ethical concerns and mutual responsibility a possibility within the group. In the particular case of “just community” education, making this interpersonal backdrop salient for students, while also cultivating a sense of justice, fosters a “sensitivity to others and an interest in their welfare as well as the welfare of the group as a whole” (HigginsD’Alessandro & Power, 2005, p. 105). In the language suggested by C. S. Lewis, or others steeped in classical conceptions of ethical life, the interpersonal ideals of constitutive communities stand to combat purely instrumental motives that individuals might hold. Constitutive communities, as opposed to more instrumental associations, provide the “First Principles”—or worthy beginnings—that bring individuals’ talents and skills into alignment with the shared values of a group. To cultivate social responsibility or moral character within the discipline of psychology, a similar view regarding community life must prevail. Although McGovern and colÂ� leagues (2010) do not explicitly invoke the notion of constitutive communities, their approach to matters of citizenship closely parallels our views here. They argue, for instance, that citizenship “is a characteristic woven into the fabric of healthy community life” (McGovern et al., 2010, p. 24). We agree, but would go so far as to say that it is the fabric.

Coming Full Circle: Serving the Community and Service-Learning So far in our argument we have tried to show the affinities between aspects of character and psychological literacy, but we have said very little about the instructional recommendations or strategies that might follow from this comparison. Given that many of the parallels we have drawn relate to matters of community and engaged citizenship, it should come as no surprise that we regard servicelearning as having a great deal of merit as an instructional practice. A clear-cut definition of service-learning is sometimes hard to pin down, but many of its advocates argue that it involves five critical features: (1) clear learning objectives, (2) student participation in determining the service activity, (3) a theoretical framework in which to contextualize the service experience, (4) integration of

276


the service experience with academic content, and (5) opportunities for student reflection and critical thinking (see Pritchard, 2001). The reflection component of this definition is especially important insofar as it allows students to “examine critical issues related to motivation, learning, relationships, and development” (Duffy & Bringle, 1998, p. 3) and ultimately achieve a new understanding of the course content and how it relates to the world beyond the classroom. McGovern and colleagues (2010) provide a wonderful example of the transformative impact of service-learning in one of their several case studies. They describe, in particular, a service-learning project in a psychology professor’s research methods class. Using their budding skills in statistics and measurement, the undergraduate students in this class helped address the question of why the services of a local elementary school’s guidance counselor were underused. In the end, the underÂ� graduates benefited from the knowledge and skills they developed through the project and the local school teachers and administrators benefited from gaining a clearer understanding of their students’ counseling needs. Service-learning, as McGovern and associates (2010) suggest, is one of the more effective ways by which to channel the skills of psychological literacy toward the service of a common good. It also offers ways to build community, both among students within the discipline and with the community beyond the university. Still, as all of our arguments suggest here, the merits of service-learning may become distorted if proper attention is not given to the kinds of relationships that emerge between the stakeholders of service-learning partnerships. In other words, while we agree that service-learning is a powerful educational tool, one that has the potential to transform students and the communities in which they serve (Brandenberger, 1998), like any other tool it may be used for either personal gain or achieving a common good. Although there are empirical studies of service-learning projects that suggest their outcomes are more pro-social than not (see Hart, Matsuba, & Atkins, 2008, for a critical review), the research findings in support of this conclusion are not entirely straightforward. At least in part this is because there is still a lack of consensus in the research literature of what counts as a suitable definition of servicelearning. One estimate indicates that there are over 200 different ways to define service-learning (Furco, 2003). It is no wonder, then, as Hart and colleagues (2008) claimed, that “the relation of theory to findings cannot be judged” (p. 486). This is one of the important reasons why clear theory-driven distinctions need to be in place to better investigate phenomena and to draw out their practical value. Unfortunately, as Bringle (2003) remarked, “A review of the research literature on service-learning leads to the conclusion that formal theories have not played a prominent enough role” (p. 7). While this conclusion about service-learning seems less than favorable, it also suggests that further research in this area is ripe for theoretical innovation and progress. It is this optimism that drives our own recent investigations into servicelearning. We argue, in particular, there are two ways to distinguish between the relationship structures that emerge in service-learning partnerships and that these have testable, psychological outcomes (Sokol & Kuebli, in progress). Drawing on


277

critiques that have recently emerged in the service-learning literature (e.g., Kahne & Westheimer, 1999; Mitchell, 2008; Ward & Wolf-Wendel, 2000), we identify two broad relationship patterns that tend to develop between service-learning stakeholders: relationships of charity versus solidarity. We hypothesize that the values underlying these relationship patterns, while both markers of generous conduct, translate into service ideals with different psychological profiles. In the case of charity, a relation of “doing for” others is emphasized. The basis of this relationship promotes or preserves hierarchical power structures (i.e., “power over” others, see Kreisberg, 1992), or relational asymmetries (e.g., more skilled or competent, more financially stable, more social capital vs. lessâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯.), that fortify the distinction between self and other, and ultimately builds an “us-versus-them” mentality. In contrast, a solidarity orientation emphasizes “doing with” others. The basis of this relationship promotes mutuality, or relational symmetries, that break down differences between individuals and blur self/other distinctions (i.e., “power with” others, Kreisberg, 1992). The result is a communal perspective: we are all in this together. Not coincidentally, these distinctions for service-learning relationships also map onto the same ideas of instrumental and constitutive relational dynamics described in our comparisons of character education and psychological literacy. We hope that further theory-driven comparisons and research will follow ours to better understand the similarities and differences between efforts to educate for psychological literacy and citizenship. We hope that our arguments will help enrich the way that these ideas—literacy, citizenship, character, and service—are understood to complement each other and, when aligned appropriately within a discipline like psychology, may operate as a powerful, transformative educational system. Although there remains a great deal of theoretical and empirical work to be done in all of these areas, there can be little doubt that the end, or objective, of these efforts is more than worthy.

Author Note The authors would like to dedicate this chapter to Martin Allen Young, late father of Janet E. Kuebli. He would have appreciated the ideas in this chapter.

References Althof, W., & Berkowitz, M. W. (2006). Moral education and character education: their relationship and roles in citizenship education. Journal of Moral Education, 35, 495–518. Aristotle (1985). Nicomachean ethics (T. Irwin, trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett. Berkowitz, M. W. (1997). The complete moral person: anatomy and formation. In J. M. Dubois (Ed.), Moral issues in psychology: personalist contributions to selected problems (pp. 11–41). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

278


Berkowitz, M. W., Althof, W., Turner, V. D., & Bloch, D. (2008). Discourse, development, and education. In F. Oser & W. Veugelers (Eds.), Getting involved: global citizenship development and sources of moral values (pp. 189–201). Amsterdam: Sense Publishers. Berkowitz, M. W., & Puka, B. (2009). Dissent and character education. In M. Gordon (Ed.), Reclaiming dissent: civic education and the 21st century (pp. 107–130). Amsterdam: Sense Publishers. Blasi, A. (2005). Moral character: a psychological approach. In D. K. Lapsley & F. C. Power (Eds.), Character psychology and character education (pp. 18–35). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. Brandenberger, J. W. (1998). Developmental psychology and service-learning: a theoretical framework. In R. G. Bringle & D. K. Duffy (Eds.) With service in mind: concepts and models for service-learning in psychology (pp. 68–84). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Bringle, R. G. (2003). Enhancing theory-based research on service-learning. In S. H. Billig & J. Eyler (Eds.), Deconstructing service-learning: research exploring context, participation, and impacts (pp. 3–21). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Character Education Partnership (2008). Performance values: why they matter and what schools can do to foster their development. Journal of Research in Character Education, 6, 73–81. Danziger, K. (1997). Naming the mind: how psychology found its language. London: Sage Publications. Davidson, M., Khmelkov, V., & Lickona, T. (2010). The power of character: needed for, and developed from, teaching and learning. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 427–454). New York: Springer. Dean, A. L., & Youniss, J. (1991). The transformation of Piagetian theory by American psychology: the early competence issue. In M. Chandler & M. Chapman (Eds.), Criteria for competence: controversies in the conceptualization and assessment of children’s abilities (pp. 93–109). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Duffy, D. K., & Bringle, R. G. (1998). Collaborating with the community: psychology and service-learning. In R. G. Bringle & D. K. Duffy (Eds.), With service in mind: concepts and models for service-learning in psychology (pp. 1–17). Washington, D. C.: American Association for Higher Education. Furco, A. (2001). Is service-learning really better than community service? A study of high school service program outcomes. In A. Furco & S. H. Billig (Eds.), Service-learning: the essence of the pedagogy (pp. 23–50). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Halpern, D. F. (1996). Thought and knowledge: an introduction to critical thinking. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hart, D., Matsuba, M. K., & Atkins, R. (2008). The moral and civic effects of learning to serve. In L. P. Nucci & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (pp. 484–499). New York: Routledge. Higgins-D’Alessandro, A., & Power, F. C. (2005). Character, responsibility, and the moral self. In D. K. Lapsley & F. C. Power (Eds.), Character psychology and character education (pp. 101–120). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. Kahne, J., & Westheimer, J. (1999). In the service of what? The politics of service-learning. In J. Clause & C. Ogden (Eds.), Service learning for youth empowerment and social change (pp. 25–42). New York: Peter Lang.


279

King, Jr., M. L. (1947). The purpose of education. Available at http://mlk-kpp01. stanford.edu/index.php/encyclopedia/documentsentry/doc_470200_000. Kohlberg, L. (1968). The child as a moral philosopher. Psychology Today, 2, 24–30. Kreisberg, S. (1992). Transforming power: domination, empowerment, and education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Lewis, C. S. (1944). The abolition of man. New York: Harper Collins Publishers. Lickona, T., & Davidson, M. (2005). Smart and good schools: integrating excellence and ethics for success in school, work, and beyond. Cortland, NY: Center for the 4th and 5th Rs (Respect and Responsibility). Washington, D. C.: Character Education Partnership. Manser, M. H. (2001). The Westminster collection of Christian quotations. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Mitchell, T. D. (2008). Traditional vs. critical service-learning: engaging the literature to differentiate two models. Michigan Journal of Community Service-Learning, Spring Issue, 50–65. Narvaez, D., & Lapsley, D. K. (2005). The psychological foundations of everyday morality and moral expertise. In D. K. Lapsley & F. C. Power (Eds.), Character psychology and character education (pp. 140–165). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. Nucci, L. P. (2001). Education in the moral domain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: a handbook and classification. New York: Oxford University Press; Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Power, F. C. (2008). Just community. In F. C. Power, R. J. Nuzzi, D. Narvaez, D. K. Lapsley, & T. C. Hunt (Eds.), Moral education: a handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 239–240). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Power, F. C., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989a). The habit of the common life: building character through the just community schools. In L. Nucci (Ed.), Moral development and character education: a dialogue (pp. 125–144). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Power, F. C., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989b). Lawrence Kohlberg’s approach to moral education. New York: Columbia University Press. Power, F. C., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2008). The just community approach to moral education and the moral atmosphere of the school. In L. P. Nucci & D. Narvaez (Eds.), The handbook of moral and character education (pp. 230–247). New York: Routledge. Pritchard, I. A. (2001). Community service and service-learning in America: the state of the art. In A. Furco & S. H. Billig (Eds.), Service-learning: the essence of the pedagogy (pp. 3–21). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Ryan, K. (1989). In defense of character education. In L. Nucci (Ed.), Moral development and character education: a dialogue (pp. 3–17). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Ryan, K. (1996). Character education in the United States: a status report. Journal for a Just and Caring Education, 2, 75–84. Sandel, M. (1982). Liberalism and the limits of justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

280


Schneider, C. G. (2010). The three-year degree is no silver bullet. Association of American Colleges and Universities. Available at http://www.aacu.org/about/statements/2010/ threeyears.cfm. Sokol, B. W., Hammond, S. I., & Berkowitz, M. W. (2010). The developmental contours of character. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 579–603). New York: Springer. Sokol, B. W., & Kuebli, J. E. (in progress). Charity versus solidarity. Unpublished manuscript, Saint Louis University. Strauss, V. (2009). Colleges consider 3-year degrees to save undergrads time, money. Washington Post. Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ article/2009/05/22/AR2009052203681.html. Walker, L. J. (1980). Cognitive and perspective-taking prerequisites for moral development. Child Development, 51, 131–139. Walker, L. J. (1988). The development of moral reasoning. Annals of Child Development, 5, 33–78. Ward, K., & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2000). Community-centered service learning: moving from doing for to doing with. American Behavioral Scientist, 43, 767–780. Wynne, E. (1986). The great tradition in education: transmitting moral values. EducaÂ� tional Leadership, 43, 4–9.

20 A Scientist-Educator Perspective on Psychological Literacy Daniel Bernstein

T

he vision of psychological literacy presented by McGovern and colleagues (2010) is broad, sweeping, and contemporary. This literacy is not limited to psychological knowledge or even to a set of skills associated with educated psychologists. It does include fluent recognition of the traditional body of findings, methods, and analytic tools, but it also asks that a psychologically literate person use that knowledge and those skills in analysis of everyday life. Literacy in this context means continuous use of psychological methods of data gathering to make decisions and solve problems, combining what is already known with what can be discovered through life-long learning. But as sweeping as that vision may be, the view put forward throughout the blueprint for undergraduate education (Halpern, 2010) also demands responsibility from a psychologically literate citizen: psychological knowledge and methods must be used ethically and in pursuit of social justice through a commitment to community engagement and action. Furthermore, those actions need to reflect a perspective inclusive of knowledge beyond psychology per se and the actions should be situated in a global context, not constructed from the provincial framework of any one citizen’s intellectual or cultural background. While there have been many visions of education as a path to morally responsible humanity, this call seems particularly modern for embracing an explicitly global perspective. Psychology teachers already face a daunting task in providing students with courses and curricula that share what our field has learned and can accomplish. The explosion of psychological knowledge in the 20th century has made it virtually impossible to give rich treatment to the huge list of topics found in a typical introductory book or represented in the course catalogue of any current psyÂ� chology department. The many resources and meetings arising from members of the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Division 2 (the Society for the Teaching of Psychology) give testimony to the ample energy psychology teachers have brought to the huge task of producing knowledgeable students of psychology, and that work has been in service of the traditional goal of merely generating knowledge among students, not ethically informed action. It seems all the more pressing that we as a field now need to elevate our expectations so that teachers

282


function as the “scientist-educators” proposed by the second chapter in the blueprint book (Bernstein et al., 2010). Casual continuation of traditional teaching practices, no matter how well they are carried out, simply will not result in educational programs that generate functioning psychologically literate citizens as proposed. Instead we will likely need the practices typical of the serious scientist-educator: deep exploration of goals, careful mining of the extensive research on learning, rich measurement of authentic performances of psychological understanding and literacy, and continuous improvement of learning through public reflection and discussion. This chapter explores what such an enterprise should look like.

A Scientist-Educator Model The preparation of clinical psychologists was revolutionized half a century ago by an APA-sponsored conference in Boulder, Colorado (Raimy, 1950), at which conferees asserted that clinicians should inform their practice by continuous reading of research and should evaluate the effectiveness of their interventions by examining evidence of their impact on clients. To accomplish those goals, graduate education needed to include formal preparation as researchers, allowing the collection and analysis of data on treatment effectiveness. In the recent 2008 Tacoma conference, a parallel argument was made for psychologists who are practitioners of teaching: responsible teaching includes demonstrating that educational programs yield observable benefits for students. An excellent educator, then, is someone who engages in continuous and informed inquiry into the learning taking place in any courses being taught (Bernstein et al., 2010). The model affirms and further elaborates the suggestion of McGovern and associates (1991) that teachers need to read and use research on learning and engage in continuous evaluation and improvement of practice. There are four aspects of teaching in which the role of a scientist-educator is readily visible, and these components of teaching are congruent with the notion of backward design in course development (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998). First, the instructor will construct an intellectual map of the course, including content decisions, relation of the course to the students’ lives and the general curriculum, and a statement of the goals to be accomplished through participation in the course. Second, the instructor will create opportunities for students to demonstrate their intellectual understanding and any affective shifts that are promoted. These indicators will provide the evidence for the instructor’s inquiry into the success of learning. Third, the teacher will develop an instructional design; this is a plan for how students and the instructor will allocate time to activities reasonably expected to facilitate or generate the kinds of performances stated as the goals for the course. Fourth, the instructor will look at the resulting performances by students to see how well the originally stated goals have been met. Progress is made as the instructor reflects on and learns from the evidence generated by students’ performance on course assignments. This model is labeled “backward” design because

A Scientist-Educator Perspective on Psychological Literacy

283

course planning starts with a statement of the final goals to be accomplished, followed by design of the measures used to assess the achievement of the goals. Only after specifying the desired end results are the course activities and readings identified, being aligned with the measured performances to maximize the likelihood of student success in learning. The elaboration of a scientist-educator’s approach to psychological literacy follows this framework, starting with the assertion of goals and ending with analysis of student performance.

A Scientist-Educator’s Construction of a Psychologically Literate Citizen Identification of Goals Most instructors have given thought to the content goals of their courses, though sometimes there is room for further consideration. Some instructors set goals that are narrowly focused on preparing students for the major, while others may assume that most students will have only one or two courses in psychology, so generalization or application of knowledge needs to be included at the entry level. The challenges in McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) statement of psychological literacy likely far exceed the stated or even implicit goals of most psychology courses, so a scientist-educator would begin with serious reconsideration of goals. How exactly does my course contribute to the students’ development along the lines put forward in the literacy model? How would my students’ learning connect with what they learn in other courses? While no single course by itself could achieve those goals (or likely any major curricular goals), it is appropriate for instructors to consider how each course contributes to the larger aims of a program. Goal setting will not be a trivial task, as there inevitably is disagreement about the priorities of some goals, or about the inclusion of some targets for learning, and these are discussions of values rather than scientific questions to be settled with data. This point was well discussed by Carl Rogers in his classic debate with B.F. Skinner on the control of human behavior (Rogers & Skinner, 1956). Although Rogers agreed with Skinner that scientific inquiry was certainly the proper way to determine what methods of teaching (or therapy) are most effective, he pointed out that the definition of success used to compare the effectiveness of the methods rested on assertions of value, not on data. For example. effective teaching of reading might be measured by speed of reading, by ability to decode new written words, by global comprehension of paragraphs, or by some combination of those and other measures. Deciding among them would be ultimately based on reasoned argument or pure preference, either directly or through the choice of yet another empirical criterion to differentiate among them. Scientist-educators would read McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) argument for a proposed definition of literacy, but they would also read commentaries on that work and possibly counterarguments proposing a different specific set of criteria for defining literacy. For example, there could be a debate among instructors about

284


how different rubrics for psychologically informed citizenship capture the meaning of civic literacy, and it would be informed by visions of literate citizenship from outside psychology (e.g., Association of American Colleges and Universities [AACU], 2007). We do not know yet how many American psychologists endorse each of the key value assertions in McGovern and colleagues’ definition of literacy, so scanning the public dialogue would be expected. Reading deeply in the literature on goals and goal setting would be as characteristic of a scientist-educator as background reading is of any good scientist. Since scientists of all stripes stay current in the literature of their fields, the scientist-educator would read both journal articles and books on teaching and would seek out conference sessions that report on teaching and learning. Being aware of a broad conversation in the field about goals like commitment to engaged community action or ability to use evidence-based reasoning in everyday decision making, this teacher would consider these goals even though they are not unique or specific to the nominal content of the course. Reading discussions and research on teaching in psychology is an important first step, but the scientisteducator will also benefit from reading a broader literature on teaching in other fields and teaching and learning as generic research topics in education. The goal of evidence-based problem solving or research-informed decision making is not unique to our field, so scanning a larger literature on teaching and learning will be an asset in setting goals for instruction.

Creation of Measures Since a scientist-educator evaluates effective teaching with evidence, creating operational definitions of psychological literacy is a critical part of the work. For much of psychology (and higher education in general) a typical class uses multiple-choice or other fixed-response questions to measure students’ understanding of course content, and this practice is driven by a combination of large class sizes and a desire for prompt and relatively objective assessment. There are good psychometric arguments to support the development of reliable, comprehensive assessment instruments for foundational knowledge of psychology, but a scientist-educator would also read broadly and consider the arguments made for various definitions of understanding. Given the grand scope of McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) conception of literacy, it would be critical to explore current psychological literature on authentic assignments (e.g., Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, & Halonen, in press) and on frameworks for evaluating the intellectual work, for both feedback and for grading. A scientist-educator would be very familiar with the influential rubric for scientific inquiry in psychology (Halonen et al., 2003) and the useful extensions and elaborations on the creation and evaluation of assignments found in Dunn, Mehrotra, and Halonen (2004). The larger educational community has also promoted the development of complex, authentic measures of academic goals. One influential source (Wiske, 1998) argued that deep understanding means someone can use what has been learned in


285

ways and in contexts that were not explicitly taught. Perkins (1998) in particular asserted that performance of understanding is more difficult to achieve (and perhaps more important) than representing understanding verbally, and Mislevy and coworkers (2002) described a powerful tool for assessment of simulated performance within the confines of academic teaching. Another line of work pointed out that the world to which we hope to generalize our class- and program-based instruction is often missing the guides and signposts that our assignments provide (albeit in the name of good instructional scaffolding). Jonassen (1997) argued that we need to include more assignments that are as unstructured (or even ill structured) as the world in which students will enact their understanding in the future. Given the emphasis on open-ended community-based action in McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) model of citizenship, a scientist-educator would fully explore this broad literature to develop an expanded vision of learning to be a citizen. Informed by these ideas from the educational literature, a scientist-educator would construct narrative accounts of complex situations in everyday life that require informed, ethical problem solving; these would be similar to the cases offered in McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) chapter. Producing analysis and solutions of these cases would be an intellectual target for students in the course or program. Success in that task would indicate that students generalized what they have learned to new contexts and that they can recognize which aspects of their psychological knowledge and skills are relevant to new problems, even without an instructor identifying those connections. Additionally, the instructor can join students in scanning public news sources for examples of situations in which people’s choices and decisions would be well informed by knowledge of psychological data and tools for analysis. Given the particular call of McGovern and colleagues’ vision, these cases should include a dimension of action. Students should be able to identify what features of a setting or community would make it most likely that individuals would take action rather than remain bystanders. On an even more challenging level, a scientist-educator might recognize the well-known gap between verbal articulation of understanding and the enacting of understanding. By creating opportunities for students to work in relevant community settings (e.g., Bringle & Duffy, 1998; Duffy, 2004), an instructor could observe choices made by students with their actual use of time and energy. Just as a behavioral scientist uses converging measures in research, scientist-educators would measure both verbal and action indicators of the critical concepts and skills being taught. If responsibility for action in support of social justice is a key part of psychological literacy, then the instructor will want to give students an opportunity to demonstrate that they carry ideas into action when presented with an opportunity. Halpern (2004) argued that education should be assessed with multiple measures, and McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) call for responsible action provides an excellent context for such a demonstration of impact from a course or program. The design of rich, challenging, open-ended opportunities for students to demonstrate their understanding can be one of the most difficult components of course and program development. When graduate education prepares future

286


faculty members as scientist-educators, they will conceive of their teaching as an inquiry into the effectiveness of their work in generating understanding. With adequate background in the teaching literature, they will be more likely to construct challenging and authentic measures that could capture the kind of committed actions articulated in this vision of psychological literacy. Being scientists, scientist-educators will also use their research and analysis skills to construct their assessment of student understanding in a way that provides useful evidence. Having given students well-crafted opportunities to show their understanding of psychological science and familiarity with the methods and findings of our field, they will create scoring systems that will provide both students and instructors with useful indicators of strengths and weaknesses. Reading the current literature, a scientist-educator would be drawn to the systematic and reliable use of frameworks of judgment, known widely as rubrics. Starting with reading excellent sources of general strategies for construction and use of rubrics (e.g., Stevens & Levi, 2005), instructors can also look at many examples within psychology of powerful analytic tools that provide insight into the nature of the intellectual achievements by students (e.g., Halonen et al., 2003). Such systems go beyond generating a number for grading purposes, as they provide critical qualitative benchmarks of levels of development. Students find it very useful to see where they as individuals fit into a matrix of intellectual component skills and developmental categories, and the distribution of all students across the categories of development provides an excellent benchmark of teaching effectiveness. Distributions of students throughout a matrix of learning give an instructor a rich picture of the current state of students’ understanding, and they also provide a point of reference for evaluating over semesters the effects of changes in and additions to course construction and delivery. Scientist-educators consider each offering of a course to be part of an ongoing inquiry into the effectiveness of a course, and they give the same care to evidence gathering that any scientist would give to research data. In the particular case of the psychologically literate citizen, many of the goals are different from the typical cognitive measures of understanding that we are all familiar with (e.g., recall, recognition, descriptions of procedures and findings, applications of known phenomena and evidence to new situations). It is not easy to frame a rubric to measure commitment to justice or readiness for community action. Here a scientist-educator would look to a teaching literature beyond the field of psychology, to learn from examples in other fields of evaluating performance on matters of attitude or action. McGovern and colleagues (2010) noted that the AACU (AACU, 2007) promoted a vision of liberal education that shares many of the qualities included in the psychologically literate citizen. The AACU had a two-year long project to develop and refine rubrics, including a set assessing qualities of “personal and social responsibility” in work done within the context of any field of study. There are four rubrics in that set (AACU, 2009) covering these topics: civic knowledge and engagement (local and global), intercultural knowledge and competence, ethical reasoning and action, and foundations and skills for lifelong learning. A scientist-educator would find these examples and use them


287

as a starting point to develop rubrics specifically suited to the construct of the psychologically literate citizen.

Identification of Learning Activities The next step in this process is identification and construction of activities in and out of class time that will enable students to achieve the challenging goals set out for a psychologically literate citizen. Instructional design is much more straightforward when the performances expected of successful learners are clear and explicit. Scientist-educators should make full use of the extensive research base on learning, as documented throughout Halpern’s (2010) blueprint volume, and the learning activities should be well aligned with intellectual goals (e.g., knowledge of scientifically demonstrated psychological phenomena), affective goals (e.g., commitment to critical values like justice, global vision, and evidence-based practice), and action goals (e.g., actually carrying out inquiry and intervention in contexts outside the academic community). Given the range of qualitatively different performances entailed by psychologically literate citizenship, it will take a close reading of the research literature to identify an optimal mix of teaching and learning activities to produce such a broad range of performance. Perhaps the easiest and most straightforward literature to consider would be evaluation of activities that generate cognitive gains. A scientist-educator would be familiar with the National Academy volumes How People Learn (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999) and How Students Learn (Donovan & Bransford, 2005), along with working knowledge of methods shown to be effective in promoting understanding of his or her field. At a minimum, such an instructor would subscribe to the journal Teaching of Psychology and each year participate in one or more of the many regional, national, and international conferences that highlight effective practices in teaching psychology. A scientist-educator would also place sufficient value on the promotion of learning that he or she would devote the time necessary to developing new skills that generate deep and long-lasting understanding. For example, using many forms of online instruction outside of class makes it possible to use face-to-face time for interactive and collaborative learning, but the instructor must learn how to use those tools and then populate them with appropriate material. Since a scientist-educator would value inquiry into learning as an important form of scholarship, he or she would invest the time needed to acquire those skills. Developing changes in attitude, commitment, and action may be somewhat harder, but all three would likely be furthered by broad use of engaged learning. A scientist-educator would be familiar with the beneficial effects of community engagement, and course activities would be modeled after the many examples of service-learning and hands-on inductive learning through projects, practica, and internships. Reading current literature on learning and teaching is part of the regular routine, and as noted earlier, psychologists have been leaders in describing the benefits of community-engaged learning (e.g., Bringle & Duffy, 1998).

288


Being part of an active community of similar scientist-educators would provide both new ideas for activities and an audience for commentary and reflection on present practices. As with developing methods for achieving the cognitive goals, a scientisteducator will not simply rely on the teaching methods he or she experienced as a student to achieve affective and action goals. Such an instructor will take the time and energy to both learn about and become proficient at teaching methods supported by evidence of enhanced affective and behavioral change. As psychologists we are fully aware of the problematic relations among thoughts, feelings, and actions, and we would be unlikely to assume that merely lecturing (even extremely well) about evidence in psychology and how it applies to everyday community life would generate the committed actions desired of a psychologically literate citizen. If that were true, psychotherapy (and all behavior change programs) would be a much easier proposition. Instead, the scientist-educator will use knowledge of research on changing attitudes, on self-perception, and on behavioral change to design community-engagement activities that are most likely to yield internalized values congruent with the actions taken. For example, students might engage in inherently valuable activities with minimal constraint and maximum opportunity for reflection on the authentic results of those actions for the community in which they were carried out. When such course-based actions are guided by intellectual content mediated by the instructor, there is a synergy of academic learning and development of commitment to responsible and psychologically informed action.

Continuous Monitoring and Public Reflection Frequent collection and evaluation of evidence is a central characteristic of scientific inquiry, so a scientist-educator will treat student performances as a continuous flow of valuable data to be analyzed for lessons learned. No one would spend a year gathering research data and then throw it away once the study was completed, but many university teachers do just that with evidence of the effectiveness of their work. Feeling the relief of another semester’s hard work completed, remaining traces of student performance are often shredded or returned to students without keeping copies. A scientist-educator would ask students for permission to place samples of their work into an archive of evidence on teaching effectiveness, allowing him or her to keep benchmarks of students’ cognitive, affective, and behavioral development. With an ongoing archive of student performance, instructors can do proactive and retroactive studies of changes in effectiveness as their teaching methods evolve and shift. The repository of prior student writing and activities is also available to subsequent students as models of good thinking, feeling, and acting. Gathering such an archive reflects a shift from considering teaching simply as a performance by the teacher toward recognizing the connected performances of instructors and students. Improvement of teaching cannot be undertaken without


289

consideration of the impact it has on the goals of instruction, as observed in the performances of our students—whoever they are and whatever their preparation, motivation, and ability. In that sense, a scientist-educator makes a scholarly contribution by documenting the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of methods and approaches that he or she has developed or has learned about from others. This sense of teaching as continuous inquiry into learning also plays a role in the evaluation of teaching, typically involving professional feedback from peers on the quality of student performances and their relation to the goals and methods of a particular course or program (Bernstein et al., 2006). Accordingly, scientist-educators need to be skilled in research and evaluation methods appropriate to the action-research context of courses delivered in ongoing educational settings. While some teachers may have the option of true experimental design, most will need to monitor and make sense of the products of their regular teaching assignments (c.f., Angelo & Cross, 1993). Sometimes this will mean simply demonstrating a desirable level of skill or understanding by analysis of complex or nuanced student performances, while other times critical features can be introduced differentially into sequential or perhaps parallel sections of a course, allowing for direct comparison. Using informal or quasi-experimental comparisons, time-series designs, multivariate analysis, or replication across different student cohorts, scientist-educators constantly ask whether innovations are worth continuing. In all of these versions of informal or quasi-experimental inquiry, keeping a deep archive of students’ performance is essential to the work of a scientist-educator. And finally, any community of inquiry moves forward by making its observations and results visible for all to see, providing an opportunity for others to use, build upon, and critique the work accomplished. A scientist-educator would regularly share students’ achievements in cognition, affect, and action with colleagues who are also interested in developing psychologically literate citizens. In making this representation, a scientist-educator describes the achievements and offers an analysis of both students’ and his or her own work. The instructor’s evaluation of the quality and level of student achievements is an important professional judgment in its own right, and he or she also attempts to identify what features of the instructional design contributed to the students’ development. Depending on how any new methods were introduced, the conclusions will range from tentative working hypotheses to replicated findings across offerings to well-controlled experimental demonstrations of effect. When well constructed and reliably used rubrics are in place, it is always valuable to show a distribution of levels of student achievement on various components of the course goals. If consecutive offerings of a course have used the same rubric, it is desirable to examine the trajectory of achievement over time, looking for continuous improvement in the ways that students approximate the ideal of a psychologically literate citizen. Even if there is no randomization into an experimentally sound comparison, demonstrating progress in performance is worth documenting as a model of achievement for others to follow. A scientisteducator participates in a community of instructors who make their students’

290


development visible so they can learn from each other and provide feedback to each other.

Informed Iterative Development of Instruction In an ideal case, continuous improvement of learning results from this careful planning, execution, and evaluation of teaching. Scientific inquiry is a continuous process of generating ideas, implementing instantiations of those ideas, and learning from the results of that implementation. A scientist-educator will change the nature and goals of his or her instruction based on the results of each class and the insights provided by colleagues who give feedback and who share their own evidence from attempts to synthesize the same kind of learning. Instructors mine each other’s work for good practices that maximize the capacities of students to articulate and apply the principles and phenomena of psychology. So far we all find room to improve in the cognitive domain, with no ceiling effect in sight. It will be more challenging to produce the affective changes proposed in McGovern and colleagues’ (2010) model of a psychologically literate citizen. Accordingly, a scientist-educator will keep close attention on any indicators of internalization of the values embedded in the target construct, looking for evidence that students move beyond simply understanding the values and begin to incorporate them into their personal frames of reference. There are some tricky ethical questions for any instructor about the kinds of influence that are appropriate to promote; sometimes we tell students that they need not agree with what we teach, but they must demonstrate they understand the positions we describe. The psychologically literate citizen model espouses just such a change in the personal perspective and values of learners, so each instructor will find a comfortable place on a continuum from understanding to internalization of those values. Regardless of the target chosen, however, each successive offering of a course or learning opportunity should yield more shift in the desired direction. Perhaps the most difficult task facing any psychologist is changing patterns of overt action, including the kind of socially responsible engagement characteristic of a psychologically literate citizen. It will be difficult to track behavior outside a typically verbal academic assessment, even while the course is actively being delivered and the instructor is arranging academic consequences for those actions. Given that the target is voluntary continuation of engaged social action, a scientist-educator will also attempt after the course is over to track continued participation in community activities that support the values included in the citizen model. While this is difficult to do and requires substantial effort, it is a sufficiently important goal in the psychologically literate citizen model that a scientisteducator would engage in the extra effort. Perhaps it could be done in collaboration with a department- or campus-wide survey of alumni, but excellent inquiry into effective generation of such citizens would require those data to evaluate instructional success and inform ongoing evolution of the teaching program. In all three domains relevant to the model citizen, the scientist-educator will track evidence from his or her own course and also hear and read about methods and results


291

from other instructors who are working toward the same goals. The best version of this inquiry includes making evidence-based adjustments to each successive offering of a course.

Scholarship and the Scientist-Educator A scientist-educator follows a logical and intentional process in working toward the goal of developing psychologically literate citizens. First he or she states a clear goal and defines a performance by which students demonstrate their achievement of the goal. Next a scientist-educator becomes well informed about what others are doing in the same effort, attending conferences and reading publicly visible material on indicators of successful citizenship development and approaches to teaching that have been used to generate such citizenship (see McGovern, Chapter 21 in this volume). Then based on that preparation, the educator implements methods of education appropriate to the goals and to the psychological community that shares the goals. As part of that course delivery, a scientist-educator creates an archive of representative student work demonstrating the levels of achievement of the important components of the educational goal, namely the cognitive, affective, and behavioral indicators of successful psychological citizenship. Using a range of analytic skills appropriate to the circumstances of the course, he or she analyzes and interprets those results, drawing comparisons with other courses or with previous offerings as needed. Finally, a scientist-educator creates a public representation of the course and its results, describing the levels of achievement, identifying as much as possible the critical elements of the course that generated learning, and reflecting on lessons learned and plans for improving the next offering of the course. These are the elements of scientific, evidence-based inquiry that are the backbone of the scientist-educator model (Bernstein et al., 2010), and that model is explicitly parallel to the scientist-practitioner model that renovated clinical education and practice 50 years ago. Another community, outside of psychology, has articulated a model of intellectual work that is strikingly similar to our scientist-educator (or scientistpractitioner) within psychology. Working under the leadership of Ernest Boyer, then president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Glassick, Huber, and Maeroff (1997) advanced a conceptual analysis of scholarship that included research, teaching, and service. Boyer (1990) had identified four domains of scholarly activity (discovery, integration, application, and teaching), but he had not articulated in any specific way exactly what characteristics those four domains of scholarship had in common. Glassick and colleagues interviewed many scholars engaged in all four domains, and they distilled those scholars’ experiences into a description of how members of a scholarly community behave. They concluded that scholars’ activities have the following characteristics: clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant results, reflective critique, and public discourse. Whether focused on research or teaching, engaged work in a community, or synthesis of others’ discoveries, scholarly communities seem universally to have those properties.

292


It is easy to see the parallel between the activities of psychology’s scientisteducator and the more generic framework of scholarship. The model presented as part of Halpern’s (2010) volume is a rich and thoroughly articulated specific case of the scholarship model described by Glassick and associates (1997). Those intellectual skills and habits of mind so carefully inculcated in graduate education in psychology are an excellent example of the ideal form of scholarship proposed by Glassick and associates. While academic communities around the Englishspeaking world have debated the real meaning of Boyer’s term, the scholarship of teaching (and learning), teachers of psychology have begun to practice just that form of scholarship in earnest. The intellectual products of scientist-educators in psychology stand as valuable and visible prototypes of this emerging class of scholarship, and further development of the model can be well informed by others working within the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) model, inside and outside of psychology. The work of scientist-educators to develop psychologically literate citizens fits especially well into Boyer’s (1990) reframing of scholarship, as fully articulated by Glassick and associates (1997). McGovern and colleagues (2010) posited a citizen who will enter a community prepared to engage in social action in service of justice and inclusiveness; those actions must be informed by the full range of psychological principles, phenomena, and evidence, and their utility must be evaluated using the analytic tools provided by psychological science methodologies. Such a person represents a category of scholar that was largely unrecognized before Boyer’s analysis of scholarly work. When academics engaged in community outreach or service, it was typically construed as merely the application of known principles to a particular setting; an academic expert was using his or her knowledge to provide tools for addressing a community issue or question. As such, many universities did not consider it to be scholarship at all; rather, it was like consulting or even simply service. What would it take, given Glassick and colleagues’ model, for such an activity to become scholarship? There were always clear goals and adequate preparation based on existing literature, but when someone brings appropriate inquiry methods, gathers evidence, critically evaluates the results, and engages in public discussion of the lessons learned, the activity is transformed from delivery of service to inquiry and evaluation. That form of scholarship, first identified by Boyer, is exactly what McGovern and associates intended for our psychologically literate citizen. The fit of our model with Boyer’s intentionally broad vision of scholarship is exceptional and illuminating.

Quality Principles for Teaching Within Psychology The practices described here (along with many others) are well captured in the summary chapter on quality principles in the blueprint by Halpern and colleagues (2010), and those principles have been adopted as policy by the American PsychoÂ� logical Association (APA). The very idea of a literate citizen who is sensitive to


293

social issues and prepared to enact his or her knowledge of psychology is well aligned with Recommendation 1 under Quality Principle 2: students should study ethics in meaningful psychological and community contexts to sensitize them to the application of their knowledge. Recommendations 2 and 3 in the same section focus on the need for instructors to be up to date on research in teaching and learning and to take the effort to implement that research when appropriate to their courses. Like the citizens they are teaching, instructors have a responsibility to bring the best of current understanding to their professional work. Recommendation 4 under Quality Principle 2 asserts that an excellent teacher will engage in continuous inquiry into the effectiveness of his or her teaching and take steps to improve over time. This principle also involves responsibility for a quality instructor; even when effectiveness is above a threshold of professional competence, there is an expectation that one should seek additional ways to enhance the performance of students. Recommendation 8 extends this responsibility specifically to the use of technology, noting that both faculty and students have much to learn in using an important domain in contemporary life. There is also significance in the incorporation of these quality principles into APA’s professional expectations. The goals for a psychologically literate citizen are demanding. It is not enough for students to learn what psychologists know and do; this new model expects them to enact their knowledge in diverse areas of their lives, informing their public selves with psychological knowledge and perspective. It seems only fair that such an expectation be reflexive, and that we as psychologists also hold ourselves to the responsibility of knowing and using the best available methods of teaching—and further, that we are committed to examining our own effectiveness to ensure that it continues to grow. The ideal vision of a psychologically literate citizen sets a very high standard for any educational enterprise or educator; it will take a good bit of focus, ingenuity, persistence, and creativity to be successful with more than a few students. It is fitting, then, to offer at the same time a model of excellence in teaching that may help achieve that challenging and very worthwhile goal. A scientist-educator will marshal the intellectual resources of his or her entire field of study to the task, learning the most effective approaches to promoting affective growth and longterm change in behavior. Using sensitive and authentic measures of this new form of citizenship, a scientist-educator will gather, analyze, and use evidence of successful achievement for continuous improvement of educational processes. And in the best tradition of scholarship, scientist-educators will create and sustain communities of like-minded psychologists in support of their individual teaching and the common goal of psychologically literate citizens. In short, a scientisteducator is a psychologically literate teacher with all the characteristics of an ideal educational citizen. What a good time this is to be teaching in our field.

References AACU. (2007). College learning for the new global century. Washington, D. C.: AAC&U.

294


AACU. (2009). Value project rubrics. Retrieved June 1, 2010, from http://www.aacu.org/ value/rubrics/. Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: a handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bernstein, D., Addison, W., Altman, C., Hollister, D., Komarraju, M., Prieto, L., Rocheleau, C. A., & Shore, C. (2010). Toward a scientist-educator model of teaching psychology. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 29–45). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Bernstein, D., Burnett, A. N., Goodburn, A., & Savory, P. (2006). Making teaching and learning visible: course portfolios and the peer review of teaching. Bolton, MA: Anker (now Jossey-Bass: San Francisco). Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). (Eds.). How people learn: mind, brain, experience and school. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press. Bringle, R. G., & Duffy, D. K. (1998). With service in mind: concepts and models for service-learning in psychology. Washington, D. C.: American Association for Higher Education. Donovan, M. S., & Bransford, J. D. (Eds.) (2005). How students learn: history, mathematics, and science in the classroom. Washington, D. C.: National Academies Press. Duffy, D. K. (2004). Service learning, resilience, and community: the challenges of authentic assessment. In D. S. Dunn, C. Mehrotra, & J. S. Halonen (Eds.), Measuring up: educational assessment challenges and practices for psychology (pp. 243–256). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Dunn, D. S., McCarthy, M. A., Baker, S. C., & Halonen, J. S. (in press). Using quality benchmarks for assessing and developing undergraduate programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dunn, D. S., Mehrotra, C., & Halonen, J. S. (Eds.). (2004). Measuring up: educational assessment challenges and practices for psychology. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., & Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assessed: evaluation of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Halonen, J. S., Bosack, T., Clay, S., & McCarthy, M. (with Dunn, D. S., Hill IV, G. W., McEntarffer, R., Mehrotra, C., Nesmith, R., Weaver, K. A., & Whitlock, K.). (2003). A rubric for learning, teaching, and assessing scientific inquiry in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30(3), 196–208. Halpern, D. F. (2004). Outcomes assessment 101. In D. S. Dunn, C. Mehrotra, & J. S. Halonen (Eds.), Measuring up: educational assessment challenges and practices for psychology (pp. 11–26). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Halpern, D. F. (Ed.). (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and DevelopÂ� ment, 45(1), 65–94. McGovern, T. V., Furumoto, L., Halpern, D. F., Kimble, G. A., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). Liberal education, study in depth, and the arts and science major—psychology. American Psychologist, 46, 598–605.


295

McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon, Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Breyer, F. J., Almond, R. G., & Johnson, L. (2002). Making sense of data from complex assignments. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(4), 363–389. Perkins, D. (1998). What is understanding? In M. S. Wiske (Ed.), Teaching for understanding (pp. 39–57). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Raimy, V. (1950). Training in clinical psychology. New York: Prentice-Hall. Rogers, C. R., & Skinner, B. F. (1956), Some issues concerning the control of human behavior: a symposium. Science, 124, 1057–1966. Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. (2005). Introduction to rubrics. Sterling, VA: Stylus. Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Wiske, M. S. (1998). Teaching for understanding. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

21 Virtues and Character Strengths of Psychologically Literate Faculty T h o m a s V. M

F

c

G ov e r n

or the 2008 American Psychological Association (APA) National Con ference on Undergraduate Psychology, Diane Halpern and the Steering Committee charged nine working groups with the task of synthesizing the literature on various topics (e.g., curriculum, student characteristics, technology and teaching, learning outcomes) in order to develop a “blueprint for the future of the discipline” (Halpern, 2010). They asked my faculty team (McGovern, Corey, Cranney, Dixon, Holmes, Kuebli, Ritchey, Smith, & Walker, 2010) to compose the lead conceptual chapter as an overarching framework for this text. After “word-smithing” a respectable second draft, we paused and appraised its quality as being traditional and stodgy, filled with predictable details gathered from too-well-known sources. On site at the University of Puget Sound, our group scrapped that entire text in search of fresher and more thought-provoking ideas. In a session that was a textbook case for its powerful group dynamics and collab orative problem solving, we created the term “psychologically literate citizens” as our touchstone metaphor. We construed it as a means to capture the imaginations of colleague faculty in the other working groups, and ultimately the larger audi ences that this conference intended to influence. At the plenary session when we introduced the term, it was immediately clear that we had succeeded. Multiple conferences, workshops, articles—and this very book that you now are reading— are additional evidence for our metaphor’s narrative power. For the APA conference book chapter on the psychologically literate citizen, we synthesized liberal learning and disciplinary outcomes with higher education’s renewed commitment to ethical and social responsibility in an increasingly global workplace. This latter vision blends naturally with the work by Martin Seligman and others in the positive psychology movement. Before and after that conference, my primary scholarly work centered on creat ing faculty renewal programs for teaching, using the virtues and character strengths research from positive psychology (see Linley, Joseph, Harrington, & Wood, 2006; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005) as my organizing schema. As I thought about our team’s processes at the APA

Virtues and Character Strengths of Psychologically Literate Faculty

297

conference, how we arrived at the concept of the psychologically literate citizen, and the case study method we adopted in the chapter to illuminate our ideas, I saw connections between the two projects. In many ways, nine colleagues, individually and collectively, demonstrated the hallmark characteristics of the six virtues and 24 character strengths about which I now write and conduct workshops. We foreshadowed this connection in one of our cases when we constructed a com posite faculty member’s pedagogical strategies to demonstrate how she modeled psychological literacy as an ideal outcome for undergraduate education in our discipline. In this chapter, I will explore the connections between teaching for psychologi cally literate citizenship as a learning outcome and modeling those same qualities as faculty members. In previous work, I described how faculty’s personal and pro fessional identities can be construed as an anthology of stories (McGovern, 2007). Over the span of a career in academe, faculty members renew themselves by prob ing these memory’s episodes and composing more self-determined, reflective narratives rather than annual snapshots for the homogenized formats universities expect for periodic performance evaluations (McGovern, 2006). In McGovern and Miller (2008), a new-to-academic-life adjunct faculty member and I first applied the virtues and character strengths material directly to teaching moments and their conflicts. She and I derived our initial definitions inductively from criticalincident vignettes that each of us generated from experiences in the classroom. In this chapter, I will extend these ideas on behalf of faculty renewal as a process of ever-more-complex psychological literacy, and affirm lifelong learning as a hallmark of faculty citizenship on behalf of many communities.

Ethical Practices for Teaching The examination of ethical teaching begins in many graduate psychology pro grams with a required course that evaluates the challenges of teaching, research, and practice by introducing the most recent “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct” (American Psychological Association, 2002). In that docu ment, there are General Principles (Beneficence and Nonmaleficence, Fidelity and Responsibility, Integrity, Justice, and Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity) followed by Ethical Standards for psychologists in many roles, including those of being a faculty member. A basic reading in such a course would be the American Psychologist article by Tabachnick, Keith-Spiegel, and Pope (1991) in which the authors focused on the beliefs and behaviors of psychologists as educators, pro posing from their survey research a list of “thou shall nots” for faculty to avoid and for students not to expect or encounter. In contrast to the approach of avoiding bad behaviors, Jordan and Meara (1990) proposed that the principles of virtue ethics require psychologists to focus on the question of “who shall I be” rather than “what shall I do” in conflict-laden situations. Kitchener’s (2000) cogent strat egy for ethical development in teaching, research, and practice was to learn how to “think well about doing good” (p. 10). To do good is a systematic process of

298


thinking AND doing. Meara and Day (2003) suggested that building a virtuous community of academic psychologists was an uncertain science that required many interpretative conversations to reconcile the discontinuities of professional life and then to debate the differing responses to the moral dilemmas encountered by scholar-teachers.

Virtues and Character Strengths for Teaching At the start of the new millennium, Martin Seligman and others launched the positive psychology movement. Having spent much of his life studying the ori gins, consequences, and treatment of clinical depression, he shifted gears in the last decade of the 20th century. Positive psychology synthesizes multidisciplinary perspectives and subfields. One of its central research topics is character strengths and virtues. Seligman (2002) proposed that well-being and happiness flow from an awareness of genetically based traits and, more importantly, are produced by implementing character strengths and virtues in daily work and relationships. Such a notion can be traced directly to Aristotle’s (2002) Nichomachean Ethics, in which he asserted that virtue first must be learned and then practiced daily to build a civic community. Seligman’s contemporary interpretation, based on empirical research, is that burnout, or lowered job satisfaction and motivation, plagues individuals when they cannot deploy their signature strengths in personal and professional tasks. One of the important research programs in this movement led transdisciplinary scholar-teacher-practitioners to examine shared virtue and its consequences for individual happiness and pluralistic well-being and social improvement. Dahlsgaard, Peterson, and Seligman (2005) evaluated sacred and philosophical texts from Buddhist, Christian, Confucian, Hellenistic, Hindu, Islamic, Jewish, and Taoist sources and identified six universal virtues: • • • • • •

Wisdom Humanity Justice Temperance Courage Transcendence

In Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification, Peterson and Seligman (2004) provided an encyclopedic review that construed virtues as gener alized ends to which multicultural, global peoples aspire, and by which societies endure as vibrantly healthy communities. Individual variations will be manifested in unique secular and sacred commitments, and with diverse public and private expressions. After reading this rich material, I was struck by the fact that the his torical and contemporary paragons of so many of the virtues have been teachers.


299

Psychologists defined 24 character strengths (e.g., curiosity, fairness, gratitude, humility, modesty, perseverance, social intelligence) as the means to achieve the six virtuous ends (see Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Individuals establish priorities for their strengths, using them to implement their identities in personal and pro fessional interactions. Life experiences become richer because the gratifications felt from work and personal relationships can be linked directly to the practice of priority character strengths on a regular basis. Because of my interest in faculty development, I translated this rich material on virtues and character strengths into more specific definitions that apply directly to the challenges of teaching and learning. McGovern and Miller (2008) redefined the six virtues and 24 character strengths for professional interactions with col leagues, students, and administrators in higher education. In more recent work (McGovern, 2011), I sharpened the focus on the virtues and strengths to integrate their characteristics with specific professorial tasks like constructing a syllabus, managing group dynamics and classroom conflicts, and post-semester reflections for performance evaluations and continuing development. The theme of all of this work is how to create programs for the sustained renewal of faculty who identify themselves as scholar-teachers-citizens in higher educational institutions with different missions. In the next section, I will integrate these ideas with the literacy and citizenship outcomes that this book features.

Virtues of Students’ Psychological Literacy and Citizenship The characteristics of psychological literacy proposed by McGovern and col leagues (2010) included having a well-defined vocabulary and basic knowledge, active use of scientific thinking and disciplined analysis to evaluate alternatives, being an amiable skeptic when solving problems, applying psychological princi ples in various interpersonal situations, acting ethically, using and evaluating information and technology, communicating effectively with many different audi ences, having an abiding respect for diversity, and being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behaviors (p. 11). To illustrate these qualities in action, we constructed two case study, alumni characters: a concerned parent commenting on a school’s recommended social skills program to modify bullying behavior, and a local resident testifying at a town hall meeting about placing a group home for developmentally disabled persons in the neighborhood. Using the lens of the virtues and character strengths, the virtues of Wisdom and Knowledge and Courage were particularly salient in the two cases. The parent demonstrated the virtues of Temperance and Humanity, and the local resident those of Justice and Transcendence as well. We constructed a third case study to demonstrate ideally how to integrate psy chological literacy and its citizenship potential. The central character was an alumna of color who began her college career taking online courses at the local

300


community college, and then enlisted in the military to secure additional financial support for her studies. A combat injury required extensive rehabilitation, but she returned home to complete her undergraduate degree in psychology. After gradu ation, she entered political life and was elected to a statewide legislative office. As a graduate, she reflected often about the psychological literacy outcomes that served her so well, and how she sustained her commitment to “giving back.” This case study could be used as a model for the deployment of so many character strengths for all six virtues. Let’s now turn to faculty members’ potential as exemplars and teachers of the virtues.

Faculty Virtues for Literacy and Citizenship In one of the exhibits in the chapter by McGovern and colleagues (2010), we listed “Quality Benchmarks for Psychological Literacy and Becoming Psychologically Literate Citizens,” an adaptation of a rubric for undergraduate psychology pro grams suggested by Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, Halonen, and Hill (2007). The char acteristics for faculty members included an overall modeling of the literacy and citizenship qualities and more specifically to “engage students through effective and creative pedagogical strategies” (Dunn et al., 2007, p. 14). Pursuing opportu nities for community service, sustaining leadership roles in organizations, being accessible to students and setting interpersonally appropriate boundaries, model ing and facilitating ethical behavior, and initiating professional development and renewal activities were more specific and positive quality benchmarks those authors listed for faculty members. One of our four case studies in the APA book chapter portrayed a faculty member who exemplified teaching for psychological literacy. Her approach to applied field projects communicated to her students how literacy can be demon strated and enhanced by the quality of their lifelong ethical commitment and social responsibility. An analysis of this professorial case study using the template of the virtues would spotlight the efficacy of the virtues as well. Let’s move beyond just one case study to a more generalized matching of the virtues with the tasks of academic life. (Extended definitions for the teaching applications for the virtues and character strengths can be found in McGovern, 2011, and McGovern & Miller, 2008; these definitions will be used in the following sections.) The virtue of Wisdom and Knowledge (i.e., using cognitive capacities to acquire and create knowledge) can be applied early in every semester in prioritizing the learning outcomes for a syllabus. With the virtue of Humanity (i.e., using inter personal character strengths that involve tending and befriending), faculty declare their core principles for relating to students and establishing learning environ ments where they collaborate with one another on behalf of significant learning. In the long weeks of a semester, the virtues of Temperance (i.e., using character


301

strengths that protect against excess in our interpersonal relationships with stu dents, colleagues, and administrators) and Courage (i.e., using emotional charac ter strengths to accomplish goals despite external or internal opposition) become essential for managing a variety of critical incidents. Justice (i.e., using civic char acter strengths that teach students how to contribute to a healthy community life) comes into play in designing learning environments and then delivering and com municating authentic assessments of student performance. Finally, at the end of every semester, after grades are submitted and commencement exercises are con cluded, faculty pause to make sense and to learn from the semester’s experiences. The virtue of Transcendence (i.e., experienced from character strengths that forge connections in our teaching to a larger universe and its meanings) enables faculty members to reflect on their narratives and situates specific episodes in a larger context of past, present, and future work. Let’s probe these abstract notions further, and try to add a greater specificity to the linkages between psychological literacy, citizenship, and the character strengths.

Faculty Character Strengths Aristotle’s (2002) Nichomachean Ethics was his textbook on the learning and practice of virtue. Contemporary scholars (e.g., Broadie, 2002) interpret his Politics as its laboratory manual. The 24 character strengths are the means to achieve the six virtuous ends. So too, many of the character strengths can be con strued as the means to achieve the significant learning outcomes that McGovern and colleagues (2010) specified for psychological literacy and the citizenship that should be one of its primary manifestations. In the following paragraphs, I will illuminate possible ways to think about this synthesis of faculty character strengths (highlighted in italics) and student psychological literacy and citizenship. (See McGovern, 2011, for much more detail on all 24 strengths as they apply directly to teaching and learning situations.) Recall several of the learning outcomes that McGovern and colleagues (2010) identified for psychological literacy: “having a well-defined vocabulary and basic knowledge, active use of scientific thinking and disciplined analysis to evaluate alternatives, being an amiable skeptic when problem solvingâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯., using and evalu ating information and technology” (p. 11). Wisdom and Knowledge’s cognitive character strengths seem directly applicable. Syllabi model the character strengths of creative and innovative pedagogical strategies as they preview how a course will probe different definitions of knowledge and psychological concepts. Curiosity and openness to experience are readily apparent in how we frame the larger objec tives for the course. The strengths of judgment and critical thinking are constantly called upon in the ways we communicate the methodologies of the discipline, in how we evaluate different information and its sources, and in how we respond to our students’ questions during every class. Love of learning and “being an amiable

302


skeptic” (p. 11) are a well-matched pair: if everything is debatable and everyone deserves a hearing, then not having to “win the point” is what we want students to do for a lifetime. Humanity’s character strength of social intelligence is particularly apt for teach ing our students about “applying psychological principles in various interpersonal situations.” Faculty model daily for their students how to become more skillful in “communicating effectively with many different audiences” (p. 11). Justice’s character strengths of citizenship and social responsibility will inform the various strategies we use in teaching students how to have “an abiding respect for diversity” (p. 11). The demographics of contemporary higher education foster the construction of learning environments that respect pluralistic and communal approaches to decision making. Nothing has more lasting learning effects than those conflict-laden critical inci dents when students observe a faculty member “acting ethically” (p. 11) in response to difficult persons and perceived no-win situations. Such episodes linger in their memories and will echo into the here and now if students can ask: “What would Professor ____ do in this situation?” Temperance’s character strengths model how we protect ourselves and others from excess. Humility and modesty will be evident in our saying forthrightly “I don’t know” despite all of our education and experience. Self-regulation and self-control will be evident in choices made not to respond immediately to a vulgar or ignorant statement made in class; prudence and discretion will be evident in what we choose to say and whether we do so in front of the rest of the class or suggest an office conference to sort through the problem at hand. “Acting ethically” (p. 11) requires almost constant Courage and its character strengths. First, we demonstrate our integrity and honesty when we take a clear stand on an important social issue in front of the class; it also comes into play when we communicate our feedback to students about the limitations in their perfor mance or skill levels. It is part of our ethical responsibilities as instructors to persist and persevere, even in a class that has “gone south” in its commitments to learning and participation level. When we bring vitality, zest, and enthusiasm to our teach ing, students’ motivations respond in kind. Ethical teaching, like citizenship, requires the grit that the character strengths of Courage collectively embody. Finally, the lifelong learning and sustained renewal required to be an effective faculty member requires that we practice what we want our students to learn: “being insightful and reflective about one’s own and others’ behaviors” (p. 11). The virtue of Transcendence’s character strengths are effective means for us to do so. Gratitude is the expression of our appreciation for what our mentors, colleagues, and students have taught us; with appreciation of excellence and awe we take con tinued pleasure in the achievements of our students, often not fully understand ing how they did so. With humor, we are able to look at our foibles and the less-than-spectacular moments of a semester with proper perspective. Above all, we can gather a sense of purpose and faith that the nuts and bolts of any one semester are just that. Finally, it is hope and optimism that bring us back yet again when the bell sounds at the turn of a semester or for a new academic year.


303

Epilogue: Being and Becoming Citizens John Dewey was the premier champion of constructing educational environ ments as places to learn about being citizens of a democracy. He captured that goal eloquently in the following passage from The Public and its Problems (Dewey, 1920): To learn to be human is to develop through the give-and-take of communi cation an effective sense of being an individually distinctive member of a community; one who understands and appreciates its beliefs, desires and methods; and who contributes to a further conversion of organic powers into human resources and values. But this translation is never finishedâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯. the only possible solution: the perfecting of the means and ways of communica tion of meanings so that genuinely shared interest in the consequences of interdependent activities may inform desire and effort and thereby action. (pp. 154–155) Faculty virtues are sustainable. Character strengths are the pragmatic means to demonstrate the distinguishing characteristics of the psychologically literate citizen. Faculty who communicate such values are indeed citizens of the academy and for the broader communities and audiences their institutions serve. Wayne Booth (1988) in The Vocation of a Teacher made this connection: Liberal education was originally called “liberal” because it was supposed to liberate men to apply their minds, their critical thinking, to the most important decisions of their lives; how to act, who or what to love, what to call good or true or beautiful. (p. 177) Achieving the liberal learning outcome of psychologically literate citizenship will place our discipline, its faculty members, and its majors at the center of every university’s mission, as among its most effective ethical and socially responsible leaders. And Aristotle would smile, with appreciation for our outcomes and our processes.

Acknowledgments I thank Randy Smith and Kristin Ritchey for their insightful perspectives and beneficial feedback on an earlier draft of this chapter.

References American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles and code of conduct. Retrieved June 1, 2010, from http://www.apa.org.

304


Aristotle (2002). Nichomachean ethics (C. Rowe, trans.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Booth, W. C. (1988). The vocation of a teacher: rhetorical occasions 1967–1988. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Broadie, S. (2002). Philosophical introduction. In Aristotle, Nichomachean ethics (C. Rowe, trans.) (pp. 9–91). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Dahlsgaard, K., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Shared virtue: the convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Review of General Psychology, 9, 203–213. Dewey, J. (1920). The public and its problems. New York: Henry Holt. Dunn, D. S., McCarthy, M. A., Baker, S., Halonen, J. S., & Hill, G. W. (2007). Quality benchmarks in undergraduate psychology programs. American Psychologist, 62, 650–670. Halpern, D. F. (2010) (Ed.). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Jordan, A. E., & Meara, N. M. (1990). Ethics and the professional practice of psycholo gists: the role of virtues and principles. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, 21, 107–114. Kitchener, K. S. (2000). Foundations of ethical practice, research, and teaching in psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Linley, P. A., Joseph, S., Harrington, S., & Wood, A. M. (2006). Positive psychology: past, present, and (possible) future. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 3–16. McGovern, T. V. (2006). Self-evaluation: composing an academic life narrative. In P. Seldin et al., Evaluating faculty performance: a practical guide to assessing teaching, research, and service (pp. 96–110). Bolton, MA: Anker. McGovern, T. V. (2007). Memory’s stories: interdisciplinary readings of multicultural life narratives. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. McGovern, T. V. (2011). Faculty virtues and character strengths: reflective exercises for sustained renewal. Manual available from the author at [email protected] McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E. Jr., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McGovern, T. V., & Miller, S. L. (2008). Integrating teacher behaviors with character strengths and virtues for faculty development. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 278–285. Meara, N. M., & Day, J. D. (2003). Possibilities and challenges for academic psychology: uncertain science, interpretative conversation, and virtuous community. American Behavioral Scientist, 47, 459–478. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: a handbook and classification. New York: Oxford University Press. Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. New York: Free Press. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: an introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.


305

Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421. Tabachnick, B. G., Keith-Spiegel, P., & Pope, K. S. (1991). Ethics of teaching: beliefs and behaviors of psychologists as educators. American Psychologist, 46, 506–515.

22 Psychological Literacy An Alumni Perspective Harold Takooshian and Giulia Landi

H

ow popular is psychology?” Years ago, one leading psychologist addressed this question in his Presidential Address to the American Psychological Association (APA):

[A]mong the sciences psychology is continually gaining groundâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯. The aca demic growth of psychology in American schools during the past few years is almost without precedent.â•¯.â•¯. . Psychology is a required subject in the undergraduate curriculumâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯. and among university courses psy chology now rivals the other leading sciences in the number of students attracted and in the amount of original work accomplished. (Cattell, 1896, p. 134) What James McKeen Cattell told his colleagues here in this 1895 Presiden tial Address is even more true today, as we see students and the general public turning to psychology in truly unprecedented numbers across the United States and internationally. In this chapter, we discuss how the rise in psychology education at all levels in the past five decades is affecting public knowledge and attitudes toward psychol ogy. This data-based essay reviews the development of the field along with its changing image and mixed views. Finally, we will explore how this meteoric growth in psychology is likely affecting the future of citizens’ “psychological literacy.” Those who have been in the field of psychology for many years will likely agree on these four points about the unusual nature of our field, and people’s perception of it: 1. Breadth: By the 1980s, no one field of learning has developed the remarkable breadth of psychology (Fowler, 1990). Like psychology, what other field is regarded as a branch of the natural sciences (NSF, National Science Foundation), social sciences (SSRC, Social Science Research


307

Council), life sciences (NIH, National Institutes of Health), humanities (NEH, National Endowment for the Humanities), and regulated professions (state license boards)? 2. Expertise: Though people would not claim to be a surgeon or accountant without training, many people see our field of psychology as simply “common sense,” and even refer to themselves as “natural psychologists” without any need for formal training, based on their own keen insight into human nature. (Sadly, some novice students rely on this intuitive understanding of behavior rather than their textbook to attempt to “ace” exams in their introductory course.) 3. Misunderstood: When people first learn someone is a psychologist, many quickly ask: “Are you analyzing me?” or “Are you reading my mind?” Such folks equate psychology with its clinical aspects—melding it with psychoanalysis and perhaps psychiatry—and exposing their own feelings of vulnerability in the process. 4. Changing: Since the 1980s this narrow public image of psychology (see #3 above) seems to be maturing. This conclusion seems based not only on the dramatic growth of psychology education, but its expansion into evidencebased practice (EBP; APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice, 2006) in so many bold new areas—including industry, government, the military, hospitals, corrections, and courts of law (Sanoff, 1981). Thanks to the expansion of psychology in the United States and internation ally and to the ever-increasing diversity of students who take psychology courses and who major in the field, psychology’s public image will continue to evolve. The outdated psychologist pop-culture stereotype is being replaced by a view of psychologists as scientifically based, transdisciplinary, and multicultural professionals—with the hope that their public perception will evolve into that of sophisticated, psychologically literate citizens committed to acting in socially responsible ways in local, national, and global contexts.

Psychology and the Public To look at public perceptions of psychology, we must first recognize that the field of psychology itself has certainly changed over the 13 decades since Wilhelm Wundt opened the first formal psychology laboratory in 1879. In its first halfcentury, the tiny field of psychology struggled to define itself as separate from spiritism, phrenology, séances, and pseudo-science (Benjamin & Baker, 2004), as well as cognate fields like counseling, psychoanalysis, or social work (Napoli, 1981). As psychology burgeoned after World War II, the 1949 Boulder Conference enunciated a much-needed scientist-practitioner training model for graduatelevel psychology that we continue to use today, much the way the earlier 1910 Abraham Flexner Commission provided a much-needed training model for

308

T he P sych o l o g ically L iterate C iti z en

U.S. medicine. More much-needed standards were developed for undergraduate psychology education at the 1991 Saint Mary’s Conference (McGovern, 1993), and more recently for high-school–level psychology education (APA, 2005).

Past Attitudes Past research on public perceptions of psychology dates back to Henry Davies’ turn-of-the-20th-century survey of “the teacher’s attitude towards psychol ogy” (Davies, 1899). In 1920, Dunlap warned: “In the fight against mysticism and pseudo-mysticism, psychology has a duty to perform, both to science and to soci ety which it cannot shirk” (p. 512)—to establish a scientific basis for psychology. We might discern three types of public attitudes toward psychology and psycholo gists then and now: (1) none, (2) extreme, and (3) mixed. No Attitude Many people have little accurate information on psychology. An unpublished 1980 public opinion poll by the American Psychiatric Association found that “Today less than 25% of the American public can distinguish a psychologist from a psychiatrist” (DeLeon, O’Keefe, VandenBos, & Kraut, 1982, p. 476). People have long equated psychology with “common sense,” “pop psychology,” “self-help,” or other fields (Bevan, 1982; Murray, 1962; Tallent & Reiss, 1959; Thumin & Zebelman, 1967). Extremism As noted above, something about psychology can elicit unusually strong senti ments from some people, at both extremes—negative as well as positive—to the point where some psychologists prefer to use more neutral self-descriptors when meeting others, like “consultant” or “teacher” or “counselor” or even “statistician.” One psychology report warned industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology con sultants to industry about these extremes in two types of managers: “The PSYCHOPHOBE is an executive who feels he is already a ‘natural born’ good judge of people. He did not need a psychology degree to learn this. For him, psy chologists are over-educated know-nothings. He is not eager to have them in his organization, using mysterious tests and statistics that he does not understand” (Takooshian, 1985, p. 79). In contrast, “The PSYCHOPHILE is quite different. He has read Orwell, and even Huxley, and is in awe of scientific psychology. He has exaggerated demands for what psychology can accomplishâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯. [S]uch business people expect us psychologists to perform miraclesâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯., so we must discuss from the start what we can and cannot hope to achieve” (Takooshian, 1985, p. 79). Mixed Views Following earlier research (Guernsey, 1923; Guest, 1948), a flurry of studies in the 1980s on public perceptions of psychology found mixed views towards the field, which leaned towards the positive, and seemed to be changing over time with


309

psychology itself (Benjamin, 1986; Wood, Jones, & Benjamin, 1986). A series of U.S. studies by Anita Webb’s team found that people had a positive view of what they knew about psychology (Webb & Speer, 1986), but that the word psychology was “an ambiguous attitude stimulus” to many (Webb, 1988, p. 487), and percep tions hinged on how the questions were phrased (Webb, 1989)—a finding echoed more recently in Australia (Hartwig & Delin, 2003), Japan (Masuda, Suzumura, Beauchamp, Howells, & Clay, 2005), and Serbia (Petrovic, Kovacevic, & Meir, 2008). Negative Views: Anti-psychology On a larger scale, if we look beyond the typically favorable perceptions of indi viduals in surveys, we can also discern trends among larger segments of the popu lation, which just as often lean towards negativism, if not rabid anti-psychology (Takooshian, 1989). Consider these fields: 1. In law, for most of the century since the scathing attack on psychology by John Henry Wigmore (1909), U.S. courts of law have actively resisted psychology as a pseudo-field claiming false expertise on such topics as mental states and eyewitness evidence. 2. In medicine (including psychiatry), a steady stream of lawsuits on “prescriptive authority” and psychoanalytic training in recent decades has shown some disdain between psychology and medicine. 3. The also-growing field of social work has often resented psychology as overbearing and hostile to its own scopes of practice, such as “clinical social work.” 4. Some journalists are noted for their biting critiques, such as Vance Packard (The Hidden Persuaders, 1980) and Martin Gross (The Brain Watchers [1963] and The Psychological Society: The Impact—and the Failure—of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychoanalysis, and the Psychological Revolution [1978]). 5, 6. Both philosophy and religion have at times seen psychology as an unwelcome force, illegitimately encroaching on their historical roles to shape social values (Vitz, 1994). â•‡ 7. In industry, managers and executives often look askance at the practical value of scientific psychology in the workplace (Gordon, Kleiman, & Hanie, 1978). â•‡ 8. Politicians and policymakers have often viewed psychologists as politically correct non-experts who seek to exert an expertise they do not really possess (PSA, 1999; Wilcox, 1989), and worthy of “Golden Fleece Awards” for wasting public resources (DeLeon et al., 1982). â•‡ 9. Animal-rights advocates have often been caustic in their attacks on psychology laboratory research on animals as cruel and painful, as well as wasteful and unnecessary (Bernstein, 1989). 10. Post-modernists increasingly voice anti-quantitative (if not antipositivist) views, rejecting attempts by any science that uses numbers

310


to study human behavior (Gross & Levitt, 1994; Takooshian & Rieber, 1996), or at least challenging such attempts (Gordy & Dunn, 1996). 11. Psychologists themselves often harbor negative views of psychology, such as the split in many schools between “hard versus soft” psychologists, or scientists versus practitioners, or masters-level versus doctoral-level practitioners. Surely many of these mixed views in the past are related to limited information about psychology. Though the APA Office of Public Communications strives to overcome such public misgivings about psychology (Farberman, 1989), this is no substitute for what can be accomplished in the classroom, between thousands of psychology teachers and their millions of students. Positive Views At the same time, looking beyond verbal responses to surveys, we can see “behav ioral” evidence of the public’s warm embrace of psychology among two groups— students and employers. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, reports chronicled the stunning growth of psychology, in two ways. First, in education: headlines regularly announced “Psychology remains the top college major” (Murray, 1996), with 66,728 graduating seniors accounting for 6.6 percent of all women and 4.6 percent of all men who completed their bacca laureate with a major in psychology in 1993—a 50 percent growth in just 5 years. A later headline asked, “Where are all these students coming from?” (Chamberlin, 2000), as these undergraduates flood graduate programs, with 53,000 psychology graduate students enrolled in 1997—up 10 percent in 6 years. In some schools, the number of applications for the clinical PhD program alone accounted for over half of all applications to all other fields in the university combined. Second, in employment: since 1980 the U.S. Labor Department’s Occupational Outlook Handbooks consistently forecast a “faster than average” growth of the psy chology job market, with shortages in some specialties like industrial and human factors (Chamberlin, 2000). Psychology was termed “the ‘in’ profession of the eighties” (Sanoff, 1981, p. 43). “The hand of psychology is increasingly evident in such endeavors as industry, criminal justice, medicine, and advertising” (Sanoff, 1981, p. 43), as psychologists expand beyond the classroom and clinic in unprec edented numbers into new applications—such as training the military, jury selec tion in courts of law, consultation with physicians, helping advertisers with consumer motivation, and airlines with human factors for greater public safety. Indeed, only a small portion of the many undergraduate psychology majors (about 6.5 percent) pursue advanced work in the discipline and become psychologists (National Science Foundation, 2006); the majority choose various other career paths. Data reveal that, out of 1,769,997 individuals who received a bachelor’s degree in psychology, 75 percent are employed in social work, sales and market ing, law, and management-related occupations, 12 percent in medicine and other health-related occupations, 9 percent in social sciences, 3 percent in computer


311

and mathematical sciences, and the remaining 1 percent in biological, engineer ing, and physical sciences (National Science Foundation, 2006). In 1987, the APA’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Leonard Goodstein asked Psi Chi, “What are 40,000 psychology majors going to do next year?” and reported APA data that “one year after graduation 90% were employed” (Goodstein, 1987, p. 3). Even if the average earnings of students with bachelor’s degrees in psychol ogy were low ($26,500) one year after graduating, their salary dramatically increased ($62,300) when measured 10 years after graduation (Torpe, 2008). Unlike other social sciences, magazine headlines regularly announced “Psychol ogy makes the top 10 of country’s hottest careers” (Burnette, 1994). Given this meteoric growth since the 1980s, a number of observers, like Harvard historian E. G. Boring, have quipped that if we project these growth data into the future, then some time around the year 2050 there will be more psychologists than people living in the United States (Fowler, 1990).

Psychology and Liberal Education More than other nations—where college often ends in a specialized diploma— the model in the United States is typically a broad core curriculum and liberal education to prepare the “whole person” prior to a career or future specialty training. Psychology educators generally voice high regard for such liberal educa tion, and the role of psychology coursework in this, as noted by APA CEO Leonard Goodstein: “I strongly believe in the high value of a liberal arts education as preparation for both work and life. And naturally enough, I have a strong prefer ence for that liberal preparation to be in psychology” (Goodstein, 1987, p. 4). Psychology sees itself as a “core discipline” (Fowler, 1990), a valued part of this liberal tradition, to teach students to think broadly, rigorously, and with more than surface understanding about others and themselves (Dunn & McCarthy, 2010; McGovern, 1993). To be sure, many students flock to psychology for this very reason, as U.S. psy chology enrollments climb to record numbers. Like many leaders in psychology, students see many virtues in psychology as a form of broad liberal education— emphasizing critical thinking, scientific method, rigorous writing, human values, self-understanding. and, not least of all, a path towards in-demand careers (Goodstein, 1987; Halpern, 2010; Miller, 1969, 1980). As other essays in this volume indicate, the study of psychology can enhance students’ critical thinking skills (Halpern & Butler, Chapter 3) and help them become more well-rounded citizens (Halonen, Dunn, Baker, & McCarthy, Chapter 10)—and students are attracted to the study of psychology because they correctly sense these “personal impacts” offered by a psychology education (Dunn, Cautin, & Gurung, Chapter 2). Yet despite students’ mass attraction to psychology (or possibly because of it), we also see what must be termed “anti-psychology” resistance among some educators in other fields—administrators as well as faculty members. Those of us who have conducted site visits of university psychology programs often uncover

312


such administrators who harbor a strong (if unstated) dislike of psychology, and use their position to create internal forces that are as powerful as they are subtle. In such cases, psychology faculty see themselves receiving short shrift for their high-enrollment programs, while administrators divert resources to subsidize less popular programs. Though such administrators may be careful to conceal their disdain for psychol ogy, a wonderfully instructive exception is the biting anti-psychology essay that appeared in Commonweal (Shea, 1976). Here, a classics professor who is also the sitting dean of “The Liberal Arts College” warns others of his “bold hypothesis” that the growing popularity of psychology courses is both a symptom and a cause of a new “breakdown of western civilization” (p. 79), in which naïve students are being “seduced” to study “the wonderful truths of sociology and psychology” (p. 79). He warns: “We must face the fact that by putting our underÂ�graduates on a staple diet of sociology and behavioral psychology we have prepared them for conformity, predictability, and normality. We have diminished their power to be free, to create, to enjoy idiosyncrasy. We have opened them to the inevitable failure of these disci plines’ methods” (p. 80). As evidence, he notes “one of the most pathetic figures in our culture is the journeyman psychologist or professioÂ�nal counselor facing human tragedy of great depthâ•¯.â•¯.â•¯. In the face of this kind of suffering, the methodology is virtually helpless and almost comic” (p. 79). Such educators equate “liberal educa tion” with “humanities,” forgetting that science is among the original “seven liberal arts,” and thus re-interpreting psychology as “outside” of a liberal education. In spite of “anti-psychology” feelings evinced by some educators in other fields, others are seriously committed to designing the best possible future for under graduate education in psychology, creating a world-class education program that provides students with the workplace skills needed in the information age and a solid academic background that prepares them for advanced study in a wide range of fields (Dunn et al., 2010; Dunn & McCarthy, 2010).

Psychology Alumni Today Up until the 1960s, it was the exceptional person who had taken a college course in psychology. But since the 1980s, the number of alumni who completed at least one psychology course has shifted dramatically—from many thousands to many millions. Figure 22.1 illustrates the growing trend of U.S. psychology education. Data on this growth can be elusive or scattered, so Table 22.1 (College Board, 2008; Mantooth, 2010; National Center for Education Statistics, 2009) tries to pull together a comprehensive profile of this growth in the past three decades, with some striking findings: 1. Undergraduate education: The number of U.S. baccalaureates was about 9,600 in 1950, then tripled to 33,679 by 1970, and by 1993 this was the single largest major on U.S. campuses, with 66,931 baccalaureates— 6.6 percent of all women and 4.6 percent of all men on campus. The


313

140,000

Bachelor’s Master’s

120,000

Doctorate Psi Chi

100,000

AP Psychology

80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000

20 09

20 00

19 90

19 80

19 70

19 60

19 50

0

Figure 22.1â•‡ Trend in bachelor’s and master’s degrees and doctorates awarded in psychology, new Psi Chi memberships, and AP psychology examinations, 1950–2009.

steady rise continues past 92,587 baccalaureates in 2008. Two-year and community colleges also offer psychology courses (if not majors). A recent survey estimated that of the 1,721 community and two-year colleges in the United States, more than 500,000 students take a variety of psychology courses every year (Brewer, 2006). Moreover, an estimated 1.2 million students now complete an introductory course each year in U.S. high schools or two- or four-year colleges (Halpern, 2010). 2. Graduate education: Only a small fraction of undergraduate majors continue into graduate psychology, compared with the great majority who use psychology as a springboard into a job or other fields (law, medicine, education, social work). Still, master’s degrees in psychology have also increased steadily, from 3,479 in 1970 to a three-fold increase of 9,845 by 1986. then 21,431 in 2008. The same is so for doctoral degrees—1,268 in 1970 tripled to 3,973 by 1988, and passed 5,296 in 2008—over 10 percent of U.S. doctorates in all fields. We also see the percentage of undergrads who went on to earn a psychology master’s degree increased from about 14 percent in 1966 up to 23 percent in 2007. 3. Secondary school: Despite a lack of precise data for high schools and community colleges, we know that high school psychology grows apace. In 2005, an estimated 31 percent of 3.3 million graduating high school seniors completed a psychology course with one of the 7,500 high school psychology teachers—totaling 998,400 students. The College Board debuted its Advanced Placement (AP) psychology test in 1992, with 3,914 tests that year. This number tripled to 12,084 in 1995, and then rose ten-fold to 151,006 in 2009—well on its way to becoming the third largest of the 37 AP fields. In addition, since 1990, the International

Table 22.1â•‡ Growth in U.S. Psychology Education, by Year

Bachelor’s Year

Master’s

Doctorate

Total Degree Total Degree Conferred Conferred

Total Degree Conferred

Psi Chi New Members

High school

Total Members

New Chapters

Total Chapters

AP Psychology

1950

9,569

1,316

283

1960

8,061

1,406

641

1970

33,679

3,479

1,268

1980

42,093

5,158

1,962

1985

39,900

9,891

3,447

8,262

157,812

19

613

1986

40,628

9,845

3,593

8,210

165,022

15

628

1987

43,152

11,000

4,062

8,732

174,754

15

643

1988

45,371

10,488

3,973

9,738

184,492

20

663

1989

49,083

11,329

4,143

10,667

195,159

15

678

1990

53,952

10,730

3,811

12,384

207,543

28

706

1991

58,655

11,349

3,932

14,030

221,573

28

734

1992

63,683

11,659

3,814

14,918

236,491

25

759

3,914

1993

66,931

12,518

4,100

16,089

252,580

47

806

6,258

1994

69,419

13,723

4,021

17,359

269,939

36

842

8,855

1995

72,233

15,378

4,252

17,511

287,450

33

875

12,084

1996

73,416

15,152

4,141

18,414

305,864

15

890

14,629

1997

74,308

15,769

4,507

19,316

325,180

25

915

18,628

1998

74,107

15,142

4,541

18,934

344,114

22

937

21,974

1999

73,636

15,688

4,695

19,420

363,534

19

956

28,291

2000

74,194

15,740

4,731

19,516

383,050

18

974

34,035

2001

73,645

16,539

5,091

19,435

402,485

17

991

42,978

2002

76,775

16,357

4,759

20,496

422,981

13

1,004

51,831

2003

78,650

17,161

4,835

22,380

445,361

9

1,013

62,666

2004

82,098

17,898

4,827

22,280

467,641

14

1,027

72,287

2005

85,614

18,830

5,106

22,994

490,635

16

1,043

87,207

2006

88,134

19,770

4,921

23,315

513,950

20

1,063

101,221

2007

90,039

21,037

5,153

23,252

537,202

10

1,073

116,128

2008

92,587

21,431

5,296

22,019

559,221

10

1,083

132,728

22,931

582,152

15

1,098

151,006

2009

Data from U.S. Department of Education/National Center for Education Statistics: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Completion Survey; Psi Chi: Annual report of the Executive Officer; and Summary Report: College Board, AP Report to the Nation.

316


Baccalaureate (IB) program offers high school exams in 26 subjects worldwide, including psychology. In 2009, IB administered 10,828 psychology exams to students in 502 registered high schools—7,333 students in the United States plus 3,495 overseas (IB Program, 2010). 4. Honors students: The number of students inducted each year into Psi Chi, the international honor society for psychology, has tripled in three decades—from 7,322 per annum in 1982 up to 22,931 in 2009 (Mantooth, 2010). Its number of chapters nearly doubled, from 548 campuses in 1982 to 1,104 in 2010, as Psi Chi now begins to expand beyond North America. Psi Chi formed Psi Beta in 1981 to recognize excellence in community colleges, which now induct over 1,000 members annually. As of 2010, Psi Chi has gown into the world’s largest honor society in any field, with over 600,000 life members of Psi Chi, plus another 30,086 members of Psi Beta—the great majority of these working in careers outside psychology. 5. United States versus overseas: In 1984, an estimated 80 percent of the world’s psychologists (defined as members of the International Union of Psychological Science [IUPsyS], of which APA is one member) lived in the United States (Rosenzweig, 1984). Since then there has been a meteoric growth of psychology outside the United States, so that now fewer than half the world’s psychologists live in North America (Stevens & Gielen, 2007). Moreover, 27 European nations have formed a cooperative “Bologna Process” to increase the portability of education and professional credentials, to the benefit of psychology education. Since European data do not separate psychology from other social/ behavioral sciences, it is hard to equate the precise levels and fields of U.S. and European education; according to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED), there were 1,573,078 level-5 social science degrees in 2007, higher than the comparable 1,273,309 U.S. bachelor’s degrees by this definition (Eurostat, 2009). From 1999–2001, Europeans worked to form a continental network called “the EuroPsyT Project,” which led in 2002 to a framework for a European Diploma in Psychology (EDP, www.europsy.eu.com; Roe, 2002). The growth of psychology education is even more rapid across Europe and other regions compared to the United States. This, combined with the increasing ethnic diversity and multicultural nature of our nation and world, is affecting the quality of the discipline of psychology in a positive way by increasing the size and diversity of psychology as an international field.

Psychological Literacy: The Outlook If the term “psychological literacy” describes one’s familiarity with and application of the concepts, methods, and values of scientific psychology (McGovern et al., 2010),


317

we can see that this has been a problem in the past. People have had incorrect or jaundiced perceptions of psychology based on their limited exposure to the field. Looking ahead, we can see a dramatic increase in psychological literacy—not only because of the dramatic growth of psychology education in the United States and internationally, but at least a few other trends noted below.

Standards Unlike most academic fields, psychology has worked hard to establish national standards for psychology education at four-year colleges, as well as high schools. Though these are voluntary for colleges, they establish a valued definition of what constitutes a psychology education (Dunn et al., 2010; Dunn & McCarthy, 2010; McGovern, 1993).

Outcomes Psychologists have pioneered the development of evidence-based “outcomes” in their other roles in the military and industry since the 1920s (employee “perfor mance appraisal”), and in mental health since the 1960s (“clinical outcomes”). Once educational standards were developed in the 1990s, it was natural for psy chologists to begin to develop educational outcomes to assess these standards (Murray, 2002).

Diffusion An estimated 25 percent of all adult Americans have completed a four-year college degree. Since most of the 1.2 million U.S. college graduates each year have com pleted an introductory psychology course, and over 75% of all psychology majors go on to fields other than psychology, the growing familiarity with psychology is also rapidly diffusing into other fields. Many of today’s practicing lawyers, manag ers, and social workers express gratitude that their liberal undergraduate educa tion included scientific psychology, to provide a useful scientific base for their later career. Without knowing it, many of us likely have an accountant, physician, or favorite celebrity who is one of the 600,000 life members of Psi Chi or Psi Beta. Globally, we see the number of psychology alumni increasing at every level— those who completed one introductory course, a psychology minor, two-year degree, four-year degree, master’s degree, and doctorate. For those among us interested in outcomes, it will be revealing to document the relation between each level and increasing psychological literacy (Halonen, Dunn, Baker, & McCarthy, Chapter 10 in this volume). Since 1895, when Professor Cattell offered his few hundred colleagues his opti mistic outlook (cited at the start of this essay), consider how very far psychology

318


has come in every way. Psychology itself has matured into a remarkably broad and evidence-based field, it has grown immensely at all levels of education (secondary, college, and graduate), it is in demand by a wide array of employers, and, not least of all, public knowledge and attitudes toward psychology approach new highs in the United States and globally. The ever-increasing number of undergraduate students in psychology, com bined with the modification of undergraduate education to increase psychological literacy, should have positive and long-lasting effects on the millions of students worldwide who enroll in undergraduate psychology courses. Those students— future leaders—will be provided with the opportunity of internationally using their psychological literacy for sustained community benefits. Public knowledge and attitudes toward psychology will likely benefit from this trend, and psycholo gists will be recognized as critical scientific thinkers and ethical and socially responsible participants in their communities—in sum, “psychologically literate citizens.”

Acknowledgments The authors thank their colleagues for invaluable assistance: Martha Boenau, Emily Leary and Tanya Mulvey of the American Psychological Association, Lisa Mantooth of Psi Chi, Thomas McGovern, Lucia Ruckova of Eurostat, and Jerry Rudmann of Psi Beta.

References American Psychological Association (2005). National standards for high school psychology curricula. Washington, D. C.: Education Directorate. APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice. (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 271–285. doi:10.1037/0003–066 X.61.4.271. Benjamin, L. T. (1986). Why don’t they understand us? American Psychologist, 41, 941–946. Benjamin, L. T., & Baker, D. B. (2004). From séance to science: a history of the profession of psychology in America. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Bernstein, E. (1989). Ethical dimensions of public opinion towards psychology. In H. Takooshian (Chair), As others see us: perceptions of psychologists as consultants. Symposium at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans. Bevan, W. (1982). A sermon of sorts in three plus parts. American Psychologist, 37, 1303–1322. Brewer, C. L. (2006). Undergraduate education in psychology: United States. International Journal of Psychology, 41, 65–71. doi:10.1080/00207590444000483. Burnette, E. (1994, November). Psychology makes top 10 of country’s hottest careers. APA Monitor, 10.


319

Cattell, J. M. (1896). Address of the president before the American Psychological Association, 1895. Psychological Review, 3(2), 1–15. Chamberlin, J. (2000, February). Where are all these students coming from? Monitor on Psychology, 32–34. College Board. (2008). The 5th Annual AP Report to the Nation. New York: College Board. Davies, H. (1899). The teacher’s attitude towards psychology. Education, 19, 476–485. DeLeon, P. H., O’Keefe, A. M., VandenBos, G. R., & Kraut, A. G. (1982). How to influ ence public policy: a blueprint for activism. American Psychologist, 37, 476–485. Dunlap, K. (1920, December). The social need for scientific psychology. Scientific Monthly, pp. 502–517. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology cur riculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Dunn, D. S., & McCarthy, M. A. (2010). The capstone course in psychology as liberal education opportunity. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 155–170). New York: Oxford University Press. Eurostat (2009). Tertiary students (ISCED 5–6) by field of education and sex. Luxembourg: Statistical Office of European Communities. Farberman, R. K. (1989). Psychology in the mass media. In H. Takooshian (Chair), As others see us: perceptions of psychologists as consultants. Symposium at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans. Fowler, R. D. (1990). Psychology: the core discipline. American Psychologist, 45, 1–16. Goodstein, L. D. (1987, Winter). What are 40,000 psychology majors going to do next year? Psi Chi Newsletter, 13(1), 1–7. Gordon, M. E., Kleiman, L. S., & Hanie, C. A. (1978). Industrial-organizational psychol ogy: open thy ears O House of Israel. American Psychologist, 33, 893–903. Gordy, S. R., & Dunn, D. S. (1996). Discerning the post-modern spirit in political correctness. Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, 5, 155–159. Gross, M. L. (1963). The brain watchers. New York: New American Library. Gross, M. L. (1978). The psychological society: the impact—and the failure—of psychiatry, psychotherapy, psychoanalysis, and the psychological revolution. New York: Random House. Gross, P. R., & Levitt, N. (1994). Higher superstition: the academic left and its quarrel with science. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins. Guernsey, M. (1923, July 11). Psychologists—so and pseudo. Outlook, pp. 364–365. Guest, L. (1948). The public’s attitudes toward psychologists. American Psychologist, 3, 135–139. Halpern, D. F. (2010). (Ed.). Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Hartwig, S. G., & Delin, C. (2003). How unpopular are we: reassessing psychology’s public image with different measures of favourability. Australian Psychologist, 38, 68–72. International Baccalaureate Program (2010). IB statistical bulletin. Cardiff, Wales: Author.

320


Mantooth, L. (2010, Winter). Annual report of the Executive Officer. Eye on Psi Chi, 14, 36–42. Masuda, A., Suzumara, K., Beauchamp, K. L., Howells, G. N., & Clay, C. (2005). United States and Japanese college students’ attitudes toward seeking professional psycho logical help. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 303–313. McGovern, T. V. (1993). (Ed.). Handbook for enhancing undergraduate education in psychology. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L., Cranney, J., Dixon, W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K. A., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. J. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the futÂ�ure of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Miller, G. A. (1969). Psychology as a means of promoting human welfare. American Psychologist, 24, 1063–1075. Miller, G. A. (1980, December). Giving away psychology in the eighties. Psychology Today, 13, 38–50. Murray, B. (1996, February). Psychology remains top college major. APA Monitor, 27(2), 1, 42. Murray, B. (2002, July). What psych majors need to know. Monitor on Psychology, 80–81. Murray, J. B. (1962). College students’ concepts of psychologists and psychiatrists: a problem in differentiation. Journal of Social Psychology, 57, 161–168. Napoli, D. S. (1981). Architects of adjustment: the history of the psychological profession in the United States. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press. National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). IPEDS completion survey. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Education. National Science Foundation (2006). Scientists and Engineers Statistical Data System (SESTAT): various surveys. Arlington, VA: Division of Science Resources Statistics. Packard, V. (1980). The hidden persuaders (rev. ed.). New York: Pocket. Petrovic, I., Kovacevic, P., & Meir, R. B. (2008, August). Global public attitudes on psychology: from Psychophilia to psychophobia. Presentation to the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston. PSA (1999, September). Science, politics, pedophilia. Psychological Science Agenda, 12, 1–2. Roe, R. A. (2002). What makes a competent psychologist? European Psychologist, 7, 192–202. Rosenzweig, M. (1984). U.S. psychology and world psychology. American Psychologist, 39(8), 877–884. doi:10.1037/0003–066X.39.8.877. Sanoff, A. (1981, Aug. 10). Psychology—the in profession of the `80s. US News & World Report, 43–44. Shea, G. W. (1976, Jan. 30). The what of education. Commonweal, 103, 78–80. Stevens, M. J., & Gielen, U. P. (2007). (Eds.). Toward a global psychology: theory, research, intervention, pedagogy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Takooshian, H. (1985). La ciencia de la seleccion de personal. [The science of personnel selection.] Ingenieria, 1(1), 77–80. Takooshian, H. (1989). As others see us: perceptions of psychologists as consultants. Symposium at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans.


321

Takooshian, H., & Rieber, R.W. (1996). (Eds.). Political correctness and social distress in academe [Special issue]. Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, 5, 99–109. Tallent, N., & Reiss, W. J. (1959). The public’s concepts of psychologists and psychiatrists: a problem in differentiation. Journal of General Psychology, 61, 281–285. Thumin, F. J., & Zebelman, M. (1967). Psychology vs. psychiatry: a study of public image. American Psychologist, 22, 282–286. Torpe, E. (2008). The class of 1993: earnings and occupations by college major, 1 and 10 years after graduation. Occupational Outlook Quarterly, 52(2), 15–25. Vitz, P. C. (1994). Psychology as religion: the cult of self-worship (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. Webb, A. R. (1988). Psychology as an ambiguous attitude stimulus. American Psychologist, 44, 487–488. Webb, A. R. (1989). What’s in a question: three methods for investigating psychology’s public image. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 20, 301–304. Webb, A. R., & Speer, J. R. (1986). Prototype of a profession: psychology’s public image. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 17, 5–9. Wigmore, J. H. (1909). Professor Musterberg and the psychology of testimony. Illinois Law Review, 3, 399–455. Wilcox, B. (1989). Psychology and politics. In H. Takooshian (Chair), As others see us: perceptions of psychologists as consultants. Symposium at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans. Wood, W., Jones, M., & Benjamin, L. T. (1986). Surveying psychology’s public image. American Psychologist, 41, 947–953.

23 What the World Needs Now Is Psychological Literacy J ac qu e ly n Cr a n n e y a n d Da n a S. D un n

H

omo sapiens considers itself the dominant species on earth (insects may disagree). Our species has broken tribal geographical boundaries to develop national and international communities, and technology has clearly revolutionized our daily lives, especially by allowing instant global communication and immediate access to boundless global information. We argue that in this new age, psychological literacy (McGovern et al., 2010) is key to both the survival and well-being of our species, and that psychological literacy thus needs to be a major outcome—possibly the major outcome—of undergraduate education. We briefly review the current aims of undergraduate programs in several countries, and then argue for a minimum, compatible set of aims for the global undergraduate psychology education of the new millennium. We then suggest some curriculum and pedagogical strategies to meet these new aims. We conclude this chapter by looking ahead to a psychologically literate future and what it might be like.

Perspectives on Psychological Literacy As sentient and seemingly autonomous beings, we are naturally preoccupied with our own well-being now and into the vague future of our lifetimes, and we are also driven by evolutionary biological and cultural mechanisms to be concerned with the well-being of our families and, in more recent human history, our friends (Buss, 2008; Dunbar & Barrett, 2009). Psychology is the scientific study of thoughts, feelings, and actions. Thus, education in psychology should impart to learners some of the knowledge acquired through the process of psychological science. We argue here that we are no longer a “young” science (cf. Stanovich, 2009), but we have reached an age of rights and responsibilities. Our right is to be recognized for what we are: a discipline that uses the scientific method to understand human thoughts, feelings, and behavior, and a profession that applies evidence-based strategies to change human behavior for the better. Because the subject matter of

What the World Needs Now Is Psychological Literacy

323

psychology is inherently interesting to every human being, it is a central discipline in all human knowledge endeavor, as is evident by the infusion of psychology into most other disciplines and professions (Boyack, Klavans, & Börner, 2005; Cacioppo, 2007; Gray, 2008). Our responsibilities in the discipline and profession of psychology are emergent and unique. An awareness of the genesis of our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors within the context of evolutionary and cultural history (Cranney & Morris, Chapter 18 in this volume), and particularly an appreciation of the increasing interdependence of human global communities and the interconnectivity of our habitat, naturally leads to our responsibility both to apply our psychological literacy as global citizens and to facilitate the development of psychological literacy in our students. Many of our colleagues (e.g., White, Chapter 5 in this volume) have focused on why psychological literacy is important, and how best to impart this psychological literacy in undergraduate (UG) education. UG education is currently one of our most convenient vehicles for increasing psychological literacy in the general population. The psychology major is the second most popular major in the United States (National Center for Education Statistics, 2008), and an estimated 16% of all Australian university students take a first-year psychology course (Cranney et al., 2008b). Psychology major graduates with at least a Level 1 psychological literacy acquisition (Cranney & Morris, Chapter 18 in this volume) will have the capacity to apply psychological knowledge, skills, and attitudes to enhance their own wellbeing, and also that of their family and friends. Higher levels of psychological literacy attainment result in what Charlton and Lymburner (Chapter 17 in this volume) call “psychologically literate global citizens,” graduates who can use their psychological literacy to help solve local (e.g., a problem similar to that illustrated by the “Dr. Cantrell” case of McGovern et al., 2010) or global human problems (e.g., behavioral interventions to reduce water use). These are the psychologically literate community leaders—indeed, the more professions that our psychologically literate UG graduates influence or shape beyond psychology, the greater is the potential positive impact of psychological literacy. The value of becoming a psychologically literate psychology major and graduate needs to be emphasized within our own departments, as well as shared outside with the general public, including potential employers. Our work as educators is clear, and in undertaking this work, Bernstein (Chapter 20 in this volume) and McGovern (Chapter 21 in this volume) entreat us to be role models in displaying psychological literacy in our actual and virtual college classrooms. Beyond the context of undergraduate education, Cynthia Belar of the Education Directorate of the American Psychological Association (APA) makes the point that there are large numbers (about one third) of high school students taking psychology in the United States, and that these classes “play a crucial role in promoting psychological literacy among our citizenry” (Clay, 2010, p. 64). Karandashev (Chapter 15 in this volume) makes a similar point about psychology education in contemporary Russia, and with the increasing numbers of high school students studying psychology in many different countries (Prandini, 2007) this educational context deserves much more attention with regard to psychological literacy.

324


A broader agenda for psychological literacy is signaled by Sarwono’s (Chapter 13 in this volume) application of psychological principles to many behavioral contexts in Indonesia. In essence, the approach is to increase psychological literacy in the general population through media and other “outreach” activities of professional psychologists within the contexts they know best. One now sees more evidence for this kind of approach in the West—for example, the Association for Psychological Science (APS) has a “Bringing it Home” public oration at its annual conference that features a psychological scientist “translating” the psychological principles and findings of his or her particular research topic for “public consumption.” Here we argue that the discipline and profession of psychology can and should reach far beyond formal educational contexts in order to increase the psychological literacy of the general population through more “popular” venues. We might add that the increasing number of trade books dealing with the popularization and application of psychological research findings (e.g., Fredrickson, 2009) also represents such forms of psychological literacy. During our short official history as a discipline and a profession, we have been overly concerned with (a) establishing ourselves as a legitimate science, placing high value on knowledge creation, particularly through basic laboratory research, and (b) sorting out professional boundaries both within and outside of psychology. There has been less value placed on applied research and on facilitating the application of psychological principles to solving or preventing human problems. Now is the time for us to poke our heads beyond laboratory doors and cease our adolescent intradisciplinary squabbles. Perhaps unique to psychology, the science and the practitioner camps are inextricably intertwined (Benjamin & Baker, 2000), and we should be taking every opportunity to apply what we know to the benefit of humanity.

International Models and Aims of UG Education Historically, European and American psychology has driven the development of psychology in other countries. A brief overview of models of UG education may give us some sense of the degree of overlap in the aims of such UG programs, and allow us to judge the extent to which such programs could be shaped to meet the aim of psychological literacy. But first, we should consider what we may value or acknowledge as realities in judging the quality of a program (Cranney et al., 2008b, 2009). For example, do we value (a) education in disciplines other than psychology, during the UG program, (b) exposure to the possibility of other careers in psychology, besides the dominant Western individualistic clinical psychology profession, (c) a significant individual research experience, and (d) the gaining of personal maturity prior to entry into professional practice? What are some of the structural constraints linked to this goal? For example, does poor funding of professional programs necessitate departments of psychology drawing upon increased UG enrollments, which means that there may be large numbers of psychology majors who do not progress


325

to professional psychology, and large first-year psychology classes made possible by all UG Â�programs being open to “other discipline” units? What are the accompanying societal constraints? For example, there may be pressure to produce mental health professionals in as few years as possible. Finally, what are the quality assurance (accreditation, registration/licensure) systems in place that shape university programs? Are these primarily input-driven (e.g., number of years) or output-driven (e.g., meeting a specific set of competencies)? UG psychology education in the United States consists of four years, and the requirements for the major vary considerably across institutions, there being no national accreditation of the program. In undertaking state registration accreditations, departments of psychology often draw upon the APA Guidelines (2007) to make a case for quality education (Don Leitner, personal communication, Dec. 22, 2006). Division 2 of the APA, the Society for the Teaching of Psychology, also supports a voluntary system of departmental review (http://teachpsych.org/otrp/ deptconsult.php). Nevertheless, there remains the real possibility, for example, that a student could complete a psychology major without ever taking a research methods course or a statistics course. Most U.S. psychology degree programs specify undertaking course units across the arts and sciences, ensuring a broad education. There have been recent “calls for a core” for the psychology major; for example, Dunn and colleagues (2010) specified a nine-course major emphasizing ethics, diversity, and research methodology coupled with broad study of the discipline’s main areas of inquiry (i.e., learnÂ� ing and cognition, sociocultural issues, biopsychology, developmental psychology), as well as both an applied and a capstone experience. Yet, the U.S. system lacks a compulsory research thesis, and “honors” may involve students working with faculty on a research project in the fourth year or simply earning high grades. However, this designation is not a requirement for undertaking further graduate training. There appear to be two major aims of UG education in the United States: (a) to provide a general liberal arts and social sciences education, which may be an end in itself, and (b) to provide relevant disciplinary knowledge in preparation for application for graduate professional training, primarily for a PhD, often but not always in clinical psychology. However, it should be noted that it is possible to enter graduate programs in clinical psychology without having undertaken a psychology major. Admission to graduate programs is based on a student’s academic profile as measured by grade point average, standardized test scores (e.g., Graduate Record Exam [GRE]), letters of recommendation, and relevant experiences (e.g., fieldwork). In this sense, the UG major, because it is not a prerequisite for graduate training in psychology, is undervalued. The call for psychological literacy as a significant aim of UG education in the United States is recent (Halpern et al., 2010; McGovern et al., 2010) and overlaps with the first aim stated above. The Bologna Model of education in Europe has been translated for psychology by the EuroPsy program (Lunt et al., 2001; Trapp & Upton, 2010). Essentially the UG program (cycle 1) is three years in duration, and focuses on acquisition of foundational knowledge, although it does also specify the acquisition of some generic practical skills, in particular diagnostic, interviewing, and group intervention

326


skills training. Some exposure to other disciplines is seen as essential, however, it is expected that most of the program will consist of coursework in psychology. There is no research thesis requirement; this is required instead in cycle 2, the two-year master’s thesis (which is followed by a one-year internship prior to registration or licensure as a psychologist). The aims of UG education, then, appear to be a thorough grounding in the science of psychology, and preparation for cycle 2. Through the so-called Tuning Project (2004), countries such as Italy (Job et al., Chapter 12 in this volume) and Russia (Karandeshev, Chapter 15 in this volume) are attempting to realign their psychology education and training to meet the EuroPsy requirements; however, other countries, such as England, consider their current program to be adequate, if not superior, to the Bologna EuroPsy model. The English model for UG education involves a three-year program, the majority of which is psychology, and includes a research thesis in year 3. The QAA Benchmarks (2007) specify foundational knowledge but no professional skills training. Clinical psychology training is undertaken increasingly in a three-year government-sponsored doctoral program, the delivery of which is primarily driven by the government. UG programs are accredited by the British Psychological Society in England. The aims of UG psychology in England, then, appear to be primarily as foundational preparation for graduate professional psychology training. This is despite the facts that (a) less than 25 percent of psychology majors will go on to undertake any other form of higher education related to psychology (research or professional), and (b) it may soon become possible to enter graduate programs in clinical psychology without previously undertaking a psychology major (Upton & Trapp, 2010). Currently, a re-examination of the aims of UG psychology in England is under way (Trapp, Banister, Ellis, Latto, Miell, & Upton, 2011). The Australian UG psychology major consists of three years and is accredited by a national body. There are content specifications, more recently in the form of graduate attributes, including knowledge, research methodology, critical thinking, values, communication, and application. Less than 50 percent of the program is required to be psychology; thus this requirement is somewhere between the English and the U.S. model. A fourth (usually honors) year requires a substantial research thesis, as well as some low-level exposure to assessment and intervention. The latter is driven by the desire of the government, but not the profession, to maintain an archaic route to registration/licensure as a psychologist, which involves having completed an accredited three-year and year 4 sequence, and having undertaken two years of supervised practice as a psychologist. Under a new national registration system (the Psychology Board of Australia), there is the possibility of an exam being imposed as an additional requirement for the “4+2” pathway to registration as psychologists. The more professionally accepted pathway to registration is through a two-year master’s program (or three-year doctoral program) in one of several psychology specialties (e.g., clinical, forensic, organizational). Thus, the current aim of UG education is to provide the basic science foundation for further graduate study (or supervision) to become a professional psychologist or a researcher/academic.


327

Asian models are highly variable but usually simulate the American or European models (McCarthy, 2007; Sarwono, Chapter 13 in this volume). One notable aspect is that an UG psychology major may not be the only entry to graduate training in clinical psychology. South American (e.g., Abramson & Bartoszeck, 2006; McCarthy, Hutz, & Gomes, 2007) and African (e.g., Plattner & MoagiGulubane, 2010) UG programs are more likely to be professionally oriented from the very first UG year; this choice clearly reflects a certain pragmatism in approaching the need for professional psychology training in non-affluent countries. Four points emerge from this very brief overview of primarily Western programs. First, although there is some variation in the aims of a three- or four-year UG program, as McGovern and colleagues (2010) argued, there is also substantial overlap in the desired outcomes of some national programs, with the primary shared aim being to impart foundational psychological knowledge. Some points of difference include (1) whether students are required to undertake a research thesis, (2) whether any “pre-professional” (or professional) skill training is undertaken, and (3) the extent to which attributes such as critical thinking, communiÂ� cation, values, and application are explicitly developed in the curriculum. This variation may decrease the global “mobility” of UG graduates; for example, it is unlikely that U.S. graduates will gain admission to a clinical graduate program in Australia unless they can provide evidence that they have undertaken an independent research project. Second, there is variation in the systems for quality control, which again will affect global mobility. Third, there is little if any explicit emphasis on psychological literacy as a viable outcome for the estimated 75 percent or so of graduates who do not undertake further psychology training following their psychology major (and, of course, psychological literacy should be seen as foundational for the other 25 percent, as well). Fourth, there appears to be little emphasis on the employment destinations of those 75 percent of graduates who do not undertake further training in research or professional psychology. We argue that, given some “tuning” of our curriculum, and particularly our pedagogy, we should be able to accommodate within a psychology major, the following aims: • Laying the science foundations for subsequent training in research or in professional psychology • Acquiring psychological literacy, at least to a basic level of application to personal and work lives, and preferably to a higher level, producing psychologically literate global citizen leaders who will make positive contributions to their communities (Cranney & Morris, Chapter 18 in this volume; Charlton & Lymburner, Chapter 17 in this volume; Halpern et al., 2010). If these two aims are met, then psychology major graduates also will be (a) highly employable (Hamilton, Charlton, & Elmes, 2008) and (b) good ambassadors for the discipline and profession of psychology, helping to alleviate public misperceptions about the nature of psychology, and enabling greater contribution

328


of psychology to solving societal problems. In the next section we consider how these aims can be met within UG psychology programs.

Curriculum Renewal and Pedagogy A simple definition of “curriculum” is that it is “an educational plan that spells out which goals and objectives should be achieved, which topics should be covered and which methods are to be used for learning, teaching and evaluation” (Wojtczak, 2002, p. 1). Educational theorists recognize that there may be differences between the formally prescribed intended learning outcomes in a curriculum, what the individual classroom educator intends, and what students perceive to be important and thus learn (i.e., differences between the “planned” and “received” curriculum; Kelly, 2004). In addition, the “informal curriculum” is a set of activities (extracurricular activities) that may be organized by the education provider, but that does not attract a grade (Kelly, 2004). Kelly (2004) argues that educators should be concerned about the “total curriculum”—that is, the entire curricular experience for the student, including what is termed the “hidden curriculum” (see also Ratcliffe, 1996). Curriculum renewal involves review of current curricula and practices against stated criteria, followed by strategic change programs to achieve specific aims (e.g., Macquarie University, 2008). Review of the aims, outcomes, curricular strucÂ� tures, and pedagogical approaches of UG psychology education (i.e., the initiation of curriculum renewal) was the purpose of the National Conference on UnderÂ� graduate Education in Psychology at the University of Puget Sound in 2008, which resulted in the volume edited by Halpern (2010), the delineation of psychological literacy and the psychologically literate citizen as desired outcomes of UG psychology (McGovern et al., 2010), and the delineation of the Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology (Halpern et al., 2010), one of which is that students should strive to become psychologically literate citizens. Bobbit (1918), one of the earliest writers on the nature of the curriculum, idealistically described the curriculum as a social engineering mechanism whereby “scientific experts” determined (a) what “qualities” should be developed in inexperienced individuals to meet the needs of society and (b) how to develop such qualities through curriculum activities. In reality, current higher education psychology curricula likely reflect what is perceived to be the current needs of society—for example, the delivery of a liberal education (for broader, flexible employment options) or preparation for professional psychology training. The nature of current curricula is determined by disciplinary traditions, authoritative bodies such as accreditation organizations, and local constraints and opportunities. We argue here that an additional explicit aim of UG education should be psychological literacy, and this aim should be delivered through renewal of the curriculum. “Pedagogy” is what educators do to facilitate students’ acquisition of the learning outcomes, as evidenced by assessment performance. There are many different


329

definitions, approaches, and theories of pedagogy (Watkins & Mortimore, 1999). For example, “critical pedagogy” refers to a teaching approach that recognizes the social, political, and historical construction of knowledge and societal structures and norms (Kincheloe, 2008). This approach may be aligned with the movement in psychology called “critical psychology,” which challenges the Western positivist orientation in psychological science and practice (e.g., Kirschner & Martin, 2010). Another example is “creative pedagogy,” which is “a trend in contemporary education emphasizing creativity and innovation as the ultimate goal for individual development and aiming at creation of a creator, not just an informed and trained individual” (Aleinikov, 1999, p. 837). Creative pedagogy can be applied to any subject matter, and the approach is congruent with (a) the general higher education goal to produce life-long learners through studentcentered approaches and (b) the UG psychology goal to build students’ capability to engage in continuous personal and professional development (e.g., Graduate Attribute 6, Cranney et al., 2008b). One pedagogical tool that has gained transdisciplinary appeal is Bloom and associates’ (1956) “original” taxonomy of educational objectives (knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, evaluation), whereby it was generally considered preferable that objectives beyond the knowledge level were achieved. Krathwahl’s (2002) “revised” taxonomy contains two dimensions: subject matter content and cognitive processes. The four categories of knowledge are factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and metacognitive knowledge (“knowledge of cognition as well as awareness and knowledge of one’s own cognition,” including self-knowledge, p. 214). The six cognitive processes are remember, understand, apply (“carrying out or using a procedure in a given situation”—executing and implementing, p. 215), analyze, evaluate, and create (“putting elements together to form a novel, coherent whole or make an original product”—generating, planning, producing, p. 215). Although this is a cognitive hierarchy of sorts, this does not mean that application, for example, cannot occur at an early stage of the curriculum; for example, a simple but fundamental psychological principle (e.g., knowledge of how to test a hypothesis) could be implemented by students in a first-year group research project (Cranney & Morris, 2009; see also Klatzky, 2009). The value of this taxonomy is that it has some psychological credibility in terms of its relationship to cognitive psychology, and so can be applied to classifying learning outcomes and so guide pedagogical strategies. Higher-level integrative knowledge aspects (e.g., metacognitive knowledge, including self-knowledge; Wilson, 2009) and cognitive processes (e.g., evaluate and create) would be indicative of psychological literacy, which is considered the “gestalt concept” that encapsulates many semi-discrete attributes or capabilities. How can the aim of psychological literacy as a psychology major outcome be realized through renewed curricular and pedagogical approaches? We give two examples here: the first-year psychology unit and the capstone unit in the final year of the program (here “unit” is a single subject or module in the larger degree program). In the higher education literature, there has been recent focus on “induction,” the transition experience in first year, particularly with the increasingly diverse

330


student body as higher education becomes more accessible. We should not ignore the opportunity to shape first-year (introductory) psychology units to facilitate transition, and simultaneously imbue maximum psychological literacy. To make the most of this opportunity, some initial effort will be needed on the part of educators to “tune” their courses to include these aims; this effort will be less if there is sharing of successful strategies in the wider psychology educator community. Students may need to work harder to achieve these increased aims; however, pedagogical approaches aimed at increasing student engagement, as well as increased centrally provided safety-net systems to support the development of enabling skills (Starfield et al., 2005) in students from non-privileged backgrounds, should turn such effort into what Bjork and Linn (2006) call “desirable difficulties.” For example, the establishment of small groups of students working on a group assessment, supported by group strategies such as those outlined by Gibbs (1995), provides the possibility of the development of social support for first-year students during the sometimes challenging transition to higher education (Cranney et al., 2008a). In learning to write a research report, scaffolded groupbased assessments on information literacy and deconstructing a journal research article will help students build up their skills not only to support the eventual writing of the research report, but also to support other assessments that require those enabling skills (Cranney et al., 2008a). A further consideration is that students and graduates who have taken quality first-year psychology units should be able to recognize the potential for psychology to contribute to solving behavioral problems; even when they have embarked on non-psychology career paths, they will be more open to such a contribution. In this way, students and graduates will contribute to more fruitful interdisciplinary and interprofessional collaborations (Cranney, 2008). In the final year of the UG program (whether this is third or fourth year), it is desirable for students to take a capstone unit (Dunn & McCarthy, 2010) whereby there is an opportunity for students (a) to integrate what they have learned across the previous psychology units and (b) to prepare for the next step in their career development (whether this is research or professional psychology training, or non-professional psychology careers). For example, capstone courses could allow students to explore some research question or issue by applying both psychological knowledge learned across the major as well as liberal education skills acquired elsewhere in the UG curriculum (Dunn & McCarthy, 2010). Some argue that a transdisciplinary integrative experience is even more beneficial, and where this is possible through interdisciplinary collaborations, this should be considered, given the likelihood of graduates needing to work in multidisciplinary teams. Capstones preferably involve application of psychological principles to “real-life” problems. For example, McGovern and coworkers’ (2010) “Dr. Cantrell” model case involved groups of students testing different hypotheses about why a school counselor was not being appropriately used in a elementary school; Harré and colleagues (Chapter 16 in this volume) describe a year 4 community psychology project on developing environmentally friendly behavior in a local school.


331

Other possible capstone experiences can be built around the history of psychology course (Benjamin, 2010), a research intensive course (Messer & Porter, 2010) or honors thesis research (Serdikoff, 2010). Some faculty members craft capstone experiences by having students participate as members of research teams (Beins & Wann, 2010) or by doing fieldwork (Grayson, 2010). Capstone experiences can even be designed to help students make the transition from college to the workplace (Hettich, 2010). In programs where there is an individual research thesis, that project is sometimes conceptualized as a capstone experience. However, it is a relatively narrow capstone experience, and could easily be enhanced by having students (a) keep an assessable journal of the process, and (b) write a reflection of how their year’s experience integrates research and practice in their UG education, as a “scientistpractitioner” capstone statement. A pedagogical strategy that could complement the capstone experience is the use of a whole-program graduate attribute portfolio, whereby students continuously track their development of these attributes from their first to their final year, reflecting on what progress they have made and what formal and informal curricular activities they could undertake to further develop their attributes (e.g., Cooper, Cohen, & Pooley, 2006; Cranney et al., 2005). These activities can be assessed using the “new” taxonomy. Indeed, this assessment provides an index of the capacity for continuous professional and personal development.

Conclusions One fundamental outcome of university education should be the ability to challenge one’s own and others’ beliefs with publicly verifiable knowledge derived through rigorous methodology, such as the scientific method (Stanovich, 2009). One of the main outcomes of UG psychology education should be that students understand that many aspects of their personal, implicit “theories” of human behavior are flawed. By creating opportunities through structured learning activities to experience challenges to their beliefs and attitudes, students become more critical and questioning about other aspects of their thinking, and are more likely to search out sound evidence to test claims regarding human behavior. The process of “unlearning” these false beliefs about human behavior is difficult and requires courage and effort on behalf of both the learner and the educator (McGovern et al., 2010). This kind of hard thinking, however, is surely what a university education should be about (Armstrong, 2008; Bjork & Linn, 2006). Although most educators aspire to teaching students such critical thinking skills (Halpern & Butler, Chapter 3 in this volume), because of the nature of the discipline, psychology educators should be more effective than most in this domain, and there is some evidence to support this view (Lehman, Lempert, & Nisbett, 1988; see also Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Critical thinking about human behavior is, of course, a core aspect of psychological literacy (Cranney, 2008).

332


As many current global problems such as climate change, terrorism, and ill health are related to human behavior (Marsella, 2007), we need to accelerate psychological literacy in the general population. The increasing popularity of UG psychology signals not only an expressed need by members of the public to better understand human behavior, but also an opportunity for psychology educators to assist current generations to gain the knowledge, skills, and especially attitudes to help solve these global problems. “Educators are the stewards and custodians of the discipline”â•¯.â•¯.â•¯. that role also makes education a lightning rod for tensions over such issues as psychology’s identity. Given the breadth and diversity of the discipline, conflicts occur as to what and how psychology is to be taught as well as how psychologists are to be prepared. “Education is the fundamental infrastructure for the whole discipline—not just for practice, science or public interest— but in creating the next generation of psychologists for all purposes.” (Clay, 2010, p. 65, quoting Cynthia Belar) We argue that psychology educators are the stewards and custodians of humanity, as through the application of psychological literacy we can help students—our future leaders—become more psychologically literate. Indeed, UG psychology education should produce graduates motivated to reduce psychological illiteracy in the general population.

Acknowledgments Jacky Cranney’s work on this chapter was supported by funding from the Australian Learning and Teaching Council, an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. The views expressed in this chapter do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd.

References Abramson, C. I., & Bartoszeck, A. B. (2006). Improving the psychology undergraduate curriculum in developing countries: a personal note with illustrations from Brazil. Journal of Social Sciences, 2(4), 108–112. Aleinikov, A. G. (1999). Humane creativity. In M. A. Runco & S. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 837–844). San Diego: Academic Press. American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, D. C.: Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/ about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf. Armstrong, J. (2008, Nov. 5). Decline reflects badly on the arts. The Australian, p. 22. Beins, B. C., & Wann, P. D. (2010). Research teams: developing a capstone experience with programmatic research. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill Jr.


333

(Eds.), Best practices for teaching beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 155–170). New York: Oxford University Press. Benjamin, L. T., & Baker, D. B. (2000). History of psychology: the Boulder Conference. American Psychologist, 55, 233–254. Benjamin Jr., L. T. (2010). History of psychology as a capstone course. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill Jr. (Eds.), Best practices for teaching beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 171–185). New York: Oxford University Press. Bjork, R. A., & Linn, M. C. (2006, March). The Science of Learning and the Learning of Science: Introducing Desirable Difficulties. American Psychological Society Observer, 19, 29, 39. Retrieved from http://bjorklab.psych.ucla.edu/pubs/RBjork_ Linn_2006.pdf. Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook I: the cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co. Inc. Bobbitt, J. F. (1918). The curriculum. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Boyack, K. W., Klavans, R., & Börner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64, 351–374. Buss, D. M. (2008). Evolutionary psychology: the new science of the mind. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). Psychology is a hub science. Observer, 20(8), 5 & 42. Retrieved from http://psychology.uchicago.edu/people/faculty/cacioppo/jtcreprints/ c07a.pdf. Clay, R. A. (September 2010). Twenty years of serving psychology. Monitor on Psychology, 41(8), 62–65. Cooper, T., Cohen, L., & Pooley, J. A. (2006). Portfolios for psychology: how to make the best of your degree. Perth: Praxis Publications. Cranney, J. (2008). Sustainable and evidence-based learning and teaching approaches to the undergraduate psychology curriculum. Strawberry Hills, New South Wales, AU: Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.altc.edu. au/resources?title=Sustainable+and+evidence-based+learning+and+teaching+appr oaches+to+the+undergraduate+psychology+curriculum&authors=cranney&ptitle= &institution=&year=All&category=All&discipline=All&rtype=&keywords=&pid=. Cranney, J., Kofod, M., Huon, G., Jensen, L., Levin, K., McAlpine, I., Scoufis, M., & Whitaker, N. (2005). Portfolio tools: learning and teaching strategies to facilitate development of graduate attributes. Proceedings of the Blended Learning in Science Teaching and Learning Symposium, September 30, 2005, University of Sydney. Sydney: UniServe Science. Retrieved from http://sydney.edu.au/science/uniserve_science/ pubs/procs/wshop10/2005Cranney.pdf. Cranney, J., & Morris, S. (2009, October). Hard science and soft heads: critical and creative thinking in the context of first-year group research projects. Poster presented at the Society for Teaching Psychology Annual Conference, Atlanta. Cranney, J., Morris, S., Spehar, B., & Scoufis, M. (2008a). Helping first year students think like psychologists: supporting information literacy and team-work skill development. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 7, 28–36. Cranney, J., Provost, S., Katsikitis, M., Martin, F., White, F., & Cohen, L. (2008b). Designing a diverse, future-oriented vision for undergraduate psychology in Australia. Strawberry Hills, New South Wales, AU: Australian Learning and Teaching Council

334


Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.altc.edu.au/carrick/webdav/site/carricksite/users/ siteadmin/public/grants_project_psychology_report_aug08.pdf. Cranney, J., Provost, S., Martin, F., White, F., Cohen, L., & Katsikitis, M. (2009, January). Models of education and training in psychology. Poster presented at the National Institute for Teaching of Psychology, St. Petersburg Beach, FL. Dunbar, R., & Barrett, L. (Eds.). (2009). The Oxford handbook of evolutionary psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. Dunn, D. S., Brewer, C. L., Cautin, R. L., Gurung, R. A. R., Keith, K. D., McGregor, L. N., Nida, S. A., Puccio, P., & Voight, M. J. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Dunn, D. S., & McCarthy, M. A. (2010). The capstone course in psychology as liberal education opportunity. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 155–170). New York: Oxford University Press. Fredrickson, B. L. (2009). Positivity: discover the ratio that tips your life toward flourishing. New York: Crown Books. Gibbs, G. (1995). Learning in teams: a tutor guide. Oxford: Oxford Brookes University. Gray, P. (2008). The value of Psychology 101 in liberal arts education: a psychocentric theory of the university. Observer, 21(9), 29–32. Grayson, J. H. (2010). Capping the undergraduate experience: making learning come alive through fieldwork. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill Jr. (Eds.), Best practices for teaching beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 279–297). New York: Oxford University Press. Halpern, D., Anton, B., Beins, B. C., Bernstein, D. J., Blair-Broeker, C. T., Brewer, C., Buskist, W., Casad, B. J., Dixon Jr., W. E., Harper, Y. Y., Hailstorks, R., Kite, M. E., Puccio, P., & Rocheleau, C. A. (2010). Principles for quality undergraduate education in psychology. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 161–174). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Hamilton, K., Charlton, S., & Elmes, R. (2008). Developing a four-year baccalaureate degree in applied psychology. Planning for Higher Education, 36, 23–32. Hettich, P. (2010). Helping undergraduates transition to the workplace: four discusÂ� sion starters. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill Jr. (Eds.), Best practices for teaching beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 299–318). New York: Oxford University Press. Kelly, A. V. (2004). The curriculum: theory and practice (5th ed.). London: Sage Publications. Kincheloe, J. L. (2008). Critical pedagogy primer (2nd ed.). New York: Peter Lang. Kirschner, S. R., & Martin, J. (Eds.). (2010). The sociocultural turn in psychology: the contextual emergence of mind and self. New York: Columbia. Klatzky, R. L. (2009). Giving psychological science away: the role of applications courses. Perspective on Psychological Science, 4, 522–530. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: an overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 212–248. Retrieved from http://www.unco.edu/cetl/sir/stating_outcome/ documents/Krathwohl.pdf.


335

Lehman, D. R., Lempert, R. O., & Nisbett, R. E. (1988). The effects of graduate training on reasoning: formal discipline and thinking about everyday events. American Psychologist, 43, 431–442. Lunt, I., Bartram, D., Döpping, J., Georgas, J., Jern, S., Job, R., Lecuyer, R., Newstead, S., Nieminen, P., Odland, S., Peiró, J. M., Poortinga, Y., Roe, R., Wilpert, B., & Herman, E. (2001). EuroPsyT: a framework for education and training for psychologists in Europe. Report by Project EuroPsyT, funded by the Leonardo da Vinci programme. Retrieved from www.europsych.org. Macquarie University. (2008). Curriculum renewal program. Retrieved from http://www. mq.edu.au/ltc/projects/curriculum_renewal/. Marsella, A. J. (2007). Education and training for a global psychology: foundations, issues, and actions. In M. J. Stevens & U. P. Gielen (Eds.), Toward a global psychology: research, intervention, and pedagogy (pp. 333–361). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. McCarthy, S. (2007). International perspectives on psychology teaching: Asia and Pacific Rim. In S. McCarthy, S. Newstead, V. Karandashev, C. Prandini, C. Hutz, & W. Gomes (Eds.), Teaching psychology around the world (pp. 479–518). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. McCarthy, S., Hutz, C., & Gomes, W. (2007). International perspectives on psychology teaching: South America. In S. McCarthy, S. Newstead, V. Karandashev, C. Prandini, C. Hutz, & W. Gomes (Eds.), Teaching psychology around the world (pp. 545–575). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. McGovern, T. V., Corey, L. A., Cranney, J., Dixon Jr., W. E., Holmes, J. D., Kuebli, J. E., Ritchey, K., Smith, R. A., & Walker, S. (2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: a blueprint for the discipline’s future (pp. 9–28). Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. Messer, W. S., & Porter, D. B. (2010). The capstone research course: a case study in the evolution of educational efficacy. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill Jr. (Eds.), Best practices for teaching beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 217–235). New York: Oxford University Press. National Center for Education Statistics. (2008). Integrated postsecondary education data system (IPEDS) fall enrollment survey: Digest of Education Statistics: 2007. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved Nov. 10, 2008, from http://nces. ed.gov/Programs/digest/d07/ch_3.asp. Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (2005). How college affects students. Volume 2: a third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Plattner, I. E., & Moagi-Gulubane, S. (2010). Bridging the gap in psychological service delivery for a developing country: teaching the bachelor of psychology degree in Botswana. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 20(1), 155–159. Prandini, C. (2007). Best practices in secondary psychology education. In S. McCarthy, S. Newstead, V. Karandashev, C. Prandini, C. Hutz, & W. Gomes (Eds.), Teaching psychology around the world (pp. 112–140). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. (2007). Subject benchmark statements: academic standards—Psychology. Retrieved from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Â� academicinfrastructure/benchmark/honours/psychology.asp.

336


Ratcliffe, J. L. (1996). What is a curriculum and what should it be? In J. G. Gaff, J. L. Ratcliff, & Associates (Eds.), Handbook of the undergraduate curriculum (pp. 5–29). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Serdikoff, S. L. (2010). Honors thesis as a capstone: a possible perfect ending. In D. S. Dunn, B. C. Beins, M. A. McCarthy, & G. W. Hill Jr. (Eds.), Best practices for teaching beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 205–216). New York: Oxford University Press. Stanovich, K. (2009). How to think straight about psychology (9th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Starfield, S., Trahn, I., & Scoufis, M. (2005). Enabling skills at UNSW: a discussion paper. Unpublished manuscript prepared for the Committee on Education, Academic Board, University of New South Wales. Trapp, A., Banister, P., Ellis, J., Latto, R., Miell, D. & Upton, D. (2011). The Future of Undergraduate Psychology Education in the United Kingdom. York: Higher Education Academy Psychology Network. Trapp, A., & Upton, D. (2010). Individual differences: psychology in the European Community. In D. Upton & A. Trapp (Eds.), Teaching psychology in higher education (pp. 1–21). Chichester, West Sussex: BPS Blackwell. Tuning Project. (2004). Tuning educational structures in Europe. Retrieved from http:// tuning.unideusto.org/tuningeu/. Upton, D., & Trapp, A. (2010). Psychology: past, present and future. In D. Upton & A. Trapp (Eds.), Teaching psychology in higher education (pp. 264–271). Chichester, West Sussex: BPS Blackwell. Watkins, C., & Mortimore, P. (1999). Pedagogy: what do we know? In P. Mortimore (Ed.), Understanding pedagogy and its impact on learning (pp. 1–19). London: SAGE Publications. Wilson, T. D. (2009). Know thyself. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 384–388. Wojtczak, A. (2002). Glossary of medical education terms. Retrieved from http://www. iime.org/glossary.htm.

Index

Page numbers followed by “fâ•›â•›” or “tâ•›” refer figures or tables, respectively. AACU. See Association of American Colleges and Universities The Abolition of Man (Lewis), 273 Aboriginal people, 243. See also Indigenous Australians Aboriginal Traditional Owners, 85 Abraham Flexner Commission, 307–8 academia, positive psychology in, 120–21 Academically Adrift (Arum & Roksa), ix accreditation standards APAC, 42 cultural competence training and, 78–79 European Union, 197 need for, 325 action, 222, 285 active learning, 167, 171 active responding, 264 adaptive cognition, 251–57 in curricula, 262–63 integrative approach to, 257–60 pedagogical approach and, 260–62 teaching strategies, 263–64 adaptive use, 8 admissions practices, 107, 113 adolescents, racial prejudice among, 60–61 Advanced Placement (AP) tests, 313 advertising, 123, 241 affective shifts, 282 affirmative action programs, 107–8 Afghanistan, 200 African Americans, 113

agency, 193 moral, 46 social, 109 AIPA. See Australian Indigenous Psychologists Association alcohol, 240 A-level, 191 Alinsky, Saul, 220 Allen, Woody, vii Allport, Gordon, 57 Almalaurea, 174 altruism, 254 alumni, 312–16 ambassadorship, 251, 327–28 American Psychological Association (APA), 4, 18t core curricula and, 16–17 Division 2 of, 281, 325 Education Directorate of, 323 Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, 21, 42, 44, 297 multiculturalism and, 244 National Conference on Undergraduate Psychology, 296 Office of Public Communication, 310 quality principles of, 292–93 style, 18, 143, 156 undergraduate quality guidelines, 42, 104–5, 131 American Psychologist, 297 Ancok, Djamaludin, 181 Anda, 181 animal cognition, 222, 226–29

338

animal management, 227–29, 228f animal research, 156 animal-rights advocacy, 309 anthropology, 22 anti-psychology, 311–12 APA. See American Psychological Association APAC. See Australian Psychology Accreditation Council The APA Guidelines for the Undergraduate Major (APA), 4, 18t application, 140, 146–47, 291 adaptive cognition and, 262 of positive psychology, 123, 125–26 of psychological principles, 149 of psychology, 158–60, 324 of psychology major, 29 of RM&S knowledge, 151 skills, 20, 132, 136t–137t of virtues theory, 49 applied field projects, 300 applied psychology background of, 146–47 examples of, 147–60 history of, 182 appreciation of excellence, 302 APS. See Association for Psychological Science; Australian Psychological Society AP tests. See Advanced Placement tests AQ. See Attributes Questionnaire Argentina, 22 argument analysis skills, 33 Aristotle, 274, 298, 301 Arizona State University, 10–11 Arum, Richard, ix Asian Psychological Association, 178 AS-level, 191 assessments, 202. See also measures analysis of, 289 benchmarks and, 286 of critical thinking skills, 33–34 ethics, 144 pedagogy and, 328–29 performance, 299 of psychological literacy, 37–38 research, 286

Index

scaffolded, 330 scientist-educators and, 284–87 of SLOs, 23 of work-integrated learning, 160 Association for Psychological Science (APS), 324 Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU), 108, 286–87 Attachment Theory, 199 attitudes, 170–71, 308–11, 318 attribute portfolios, 262–63 Attributes Questionnaire (AQ), 227 attrition rates, 93 Australia, 22, 91–92, 326 Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, 92 Australian Indigenous Psychologists Association (AIPA), 78–79 Australian Medical Council, 79 Australian Psychological Society (APS), 76 Code of Ethics, 42–44 Ethical Guidelines, 42 Australian Psychology Accreditation Council (APAC), 42, 77–78 Authentic Happiness (website), 126 Authentic Happiness Theory, 126 authenticity, 83 autonomy, 168 awe, 302 backward design, 282–83 behavior. See also ethical behavior adaptive cognition and, 251–52 competencies, 207 control of, 283 critical thinking about, 331 culture of, 207 environmental, 221, 242 evolutionary psychology and, 253–54 flawed theories of, 331 influence of cognitive processes on, 93 maladaptive, 6–7 modification, of self, 149–50 scientific principles about, 93 behavior-change diary, 223 Belar, Cynthia, 323

Index

benchmarks assessments and, 286 QAA, 194–95, 196t–197t subject, 194–97 Ben-Shahar, Tal, 126 bias confirmation, 254 intergroup, 56, 63–67 perceptual, 139 social, 139 Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, 7 Bok, Derek, 113 Bologna Process, 37, 173, 206, 208, 213, 316, 325–26 Booth, Wayne, 303 Boring, E. G., 311 Boulder Conference, 307 Boulder model, 146 Bowen, William G., 113 Boyer, Ernest, 291 Bradley Report, 91 Bransford, John D., 287 Braun, Virginia, 223 Brief Strengths Test, 253 Britishness, 192 British Psychological Society, 194, 198, 326 Broaden and Build Theory, 126, 258 Brown, Ann L., 287 Brown, Roger, x Buddhism, 258 Budiman, Aries, 185t bullying, 299 Bureau of Labor Statistics, 28 Burton, Lorelle, 82 Canada, 234–36 drug abuse in, 239–42 healthcare in, 237–39 multiculturalism in, 234–36, 243–45 sustainability in, 234–36, 242–43, 245 Canada Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating (CSGVP), 236 Canadian Parliamentary Research Branch, 242 capstone courses, 16 balanced, 201

339

CHIP, 200 positive psychology and, 124 psychological literacy and, 20–21 psychology major and, 144 speaking and, 19 types of, 330–31 career development, 159 Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 291 case studies, 299–300 Cattell, James McKeen, 306 CDAMS. See Committee of Deans of Australian Medical Schools character, 270 building, 235 good, 49–51 moral, 271–73 performance, 272 character strengths, 121, 264, 297, 303 citizenship and, 9, 125 faculty, 301–2 for teaching, 298–99 Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification (Peterson & Seligman), 298 charity, 193, 277 CHIP. See Conceptual and Historical Issues in Psychology CIRP. See Cooperative Institutional Research Program citizenship, 3–4 adaptive cognition and, 259 character strengths and, 9, 125 concept of, 9–10 deconstruction of, 200 development of, 254 education and, 83–84 faculty virtues for, 300–301 global issues and, 200 justice and, 9, 125 meta-ethical, 47 moral character and, 271–73 promotion of, 5 student virtues for, 299–300 in UK, 191–94 civic duty, 193 civil rights, of Indigenous Australians, 73

340

civil society, 193 CLA. See Collegiate Learning Assessment Clark, Yvonne, 81 class exercises, 211, 245 classical virtue theory, 45, 49–50 classroom conflicts, 299 cleverness, 274 clinical judgment, 33 coaching, 121–22, 124 Cocking, Rodney R., 287 cognitive disequilibrium, 106 cognitive elite, 257 cognitive errors, 139 cognitive fallacies, 153 cognitive processes, 329 critical thinking and, 95 influence on behavior of, 93 in memory, 34 problem solving and, 95 self-regulation of, 36 cognitive readiness, 269 collaboration, 19–20, 157, 296 College Board, 313 Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA), ix colonization, 73, 80, 84 Committee of Deans of Australian Medical Schools (CDAMS), 79 Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE), 16 common sense, 308 Commonweal, 312 communication, 8, 150 community psychology and, 231 competency, 207 in courses, 95 intergroup harmony exercises and, 63 oral, 157 skills development, 156–58 sociocultural context of, 139 technology, 157, 254 community adaptive cognition and, 260 awareness, 49 constitutive, 275 contexts, 293

Index

culture of, 274 engagement, 287–88 evolution of, 254 of inquiry, 289 instrumental, 275 just, 273–75 organizations, 47 positive engagement with, 42 psychology, 72, 223, 231 service, 275–77 well-being, 84 work experience, 202 competence-based approach, 167, 169–71 competencies, 15, 170. See also cultural competence basic, 170–71 behavior, 207 communication, 207 CRI, 114 critical thinking, 32–33 cultural, 49, 214 general, 214 management, 215 organizational, 215 professional, 214–15 psychological, 207 research, 215 self-efficacy and, 169 teaching, 215 complexity, 173 computer skills, 214 Conceptual and Historical Issues in Psychology (CHIP), 200 conditional responsibilities, 45 confirmation bias, 254 consumerism, 83, 200 contact, 57–59, 156. See also cooperative contact content, 132, 134t courses, 16, 97–98 knowledge, 30 subject matter, 329 cooperative contact, 57–59, 62, 69 imagined contact and, 156 social strengths of, 61 cooperative dual identity practices, 60–61

Index

Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP), 112–14 courage, 298, 301 courses. See also capstone courses backward design of, 282–83 communication in, 95 conservation, 243 content, 16, 97–98 diversity, 108–9 environmental psychology, 229–30 first-year, 92–93, 102 Indigenous psychology, 100–101 intellectual maps of, 282 introductory, 16, 97, 105, 133, 138–40 methodology, 16 modularization of, 201 one-day, 189 positive psychology, 126 psychology, 21–22 in Russian UG psychology education, 209–10 specialized, 201 tuning of, 330 creating, 7–8 creative thinking, 153–54 creativity, culture of, 207 CRI. See cross-racial interaction critical inquiry, 98–99 critical reflexivity, 82–84 critical thinking, 8, 30–34, 132, 135t, 301 assessment of, 33–34 about behavior, 331 cognitive processes and, 95 culture of community and, 274 definition of, 30 development of, 95, 102, 152–54 dispositions for, 35–36 encouragement of, 202 in first-year student experience, 100 flexibility in, 35 intergroup harmony exercises and, 63 moral character and, 272 psychological literacy and, 30–36 psychology major and, 142 in real-world situations, 172–73 in research, 154 scientific reasoning and, 36–37

341

service learning and, 276 skills, 270 teaching of, 32, 34 cross-cultural psychology, 100–102 cross-racial interaction (CRI), 108, 112–15 CSGVP. See Canada Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, 122 CUE. See Committee on Undergraduate Education cultural awareness, 75–76, 149, 167, 173–75, 235 cultural competence growth of, 81 motivation for, 175 need for, 86 requirements for, 73 social justice and, 74 training, 78–79 cultural diagrams, 101, 149 cultural diversity APAC and, 77 in first-year student experience, 100–101 multiculturalism and, 57 socializing to encourage, 62, 69 values development and, 155 cultural identity, 101 cultural imperialism, 80, 84 cultural norms, 82 cultural outcomes, 214 cultural perspectives, 21 cultural rights, 73 curiosity, 301 curricula, 15 adaptive cognition and, 262–63 age-appropriate, 269 cooperative dual identity practices in, 60–61 core, 16–17 design, 169–75 diversity, 108–10, 112–14 domain-specific, 28 ecological literacy, 222 ethics instruction, 50–52 global perspective on, 21–22

342

curricula (contd.) hidden, 328 history of, 16–17 implementation, 23, 132 Indigenous perspectives in, 79, 83–85 input-based, 169–70 models, 46 multiculturalism in, 244 output-based, 169–70 overcrowding, 50 psychological literacy and, 17–23 psychologically literacy and, 15 renewal, 328–31 research and, 19 SLOs and, 17–21 total, 328 tuning of, 327 in UK, 198–201 Dahniel, Rycko Amelza, 185t DAM test. See Draw a Man test Danziger, Kurt, 274 Darlastan-Jones, Dawn, 80–81 data, interpretation of, 199 databases, 20 Davis, Hank, 253–54 Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, 242 decision making, 168 Canada and, 234 ethical framework for, 46, 50 moral, 44–45 practicing, 45 professional, 45 in real-world situations, 172–73 skills, 33 Declaration of Independence, 258 defense mechanisms, 139 Defining Issues Test-2 (DIT-2), 244–45 degrees, 313f democracy, 113, 214 Dennett, Daniel, 228 department planning goals in, 261 for introductory courses, 140 psychology major and, 143–44 psychology minor and, 141–42 Descartes, René, 181–82

Index

design terminology, 139 developmental psychology, 193, 199–200 adaptive cognition and, 252 in Russian UG psychology education, 209 volunteerism and, 237 Dewey, John, 303 dienotes, 274 diffusion, 317–18 disciplinary outcomes, 296 discourses, 74, 85 discovery, 291 discretion, 302 discrimination, 80, 155 discursive instruction, 48 discussion forums, 100 dissertations of non-psychologists, 183 of University of Indonesia, 184t–185t DIT-2. See Defining Issues Test-2 diversity, 98–99. See also cultural diversity awareness, 99 benefits of, 110–11 in Canada, 234–36 climate for, 110, 114 co-curricular, 108–10 with commonality, 61 courses, 108–9 cultural, 104 curricular, 108–10, 112–14 definition of, 41–42 density index, 110 global citizenry and, 8, 10, 21 in group discussion, 111–12 ingroup/outgroup thinking and, 255 initiatives, 107 interaction, 109–10 learning theory and, 106 multiculturalism and, 243–45 press, 110 problem solving skills and, 244–45 psychological literacy and, 105, 111–13 psychologically literate citizens and, 113–14 racial, 104, 107–10 requirements, 108

Index

respect for, 21, 42, 168 SLOs and, 107, 113 structural, 107–14 among students, 84 trends, 107–10 UG psychology education and, 104–5 values development and, 154 Diversity Task Force of the Society for the Teaching of Psychology, 244–45 doctorates, 313, 313f dogmatism, 35 dominant groups, 75, 82 dominant societies, 80 Donovan, M. Suzanne, 287 Draw a Man (DAM) test, 180 drug abuse, 234–36, 239–42, 245 dual identity framework, 59–60 Dudgeon, Pat, 79–82 economic productivity, 197–98 ecotourism, 226 ECTS. See European Credit Transfer System EDP. See European Diploma in Psychology education. See also graduate education; higher education; undergraduate psychology education APAC and, 77–78 citizenship and, 83–84 equitable access to, 84 experiences, 83 formal, 7 general, 209 informal, 7 just community, 275 liberal, 5, 208–10, 311–12 medical, 33, 47–48 moral, 271–74 non-psychology, 324 objectives, 329 online, 94 psychology, 209 quality of life and, 264–65 scientist-practitioner model of, 92 socially inclusiveness, 60–61

343

standards, 317 in UK, 194–97 world philosophies of, 217 Education in Psychology: A Blueprint for the Future of the Discipline (Halpern), 13 efficiency, 269–70 EFPSA. See European Federation of Psychology Students Associations ego states, 212 EHEA. See European Higher Education Area emotions, 168 empathy, 19–20 employment, 263, 310–11, 327 basic competencies and, 170 empowerment, 231 enthusiasm, 302 environmental behavior, 221, 242 Environmental Champions group, 229–30 environmental issues, 200, 220 Canada and, 234–36, 242–43 human ecology and, 256 risks in, 221 epistemology, 7 EPQ. See Eysenck Personality Questionnaire equity, 98–99 ergonomics, 235 ethical behavior, 4, 6, 42, 296 adaptive use and, 8 Canada and, 234 evaluative criteria for, 46 practice of, 51 of students, 21 for teaching, 297–98 values development and, 154–55 ethical dilemmas, 156 ethical literacy, ix, 42–46 implications of, 50–51 methods for enhancing, 47–50 ethical reasoning, 286 ethical theory, 44–45 classical virtue, 45, 49–50 deontological, 44–45 formal training in, 47

Index

344

ethics, 98–99 of animal management, 227–29, 228f of animal research, 156 in APAC education standards, 78 assessment, 144 breaches of, 52 codes of, 200 contextual complexities in, 50 cultural awareness and, 235 definition of, 43 dialogical, 48 efficiency and, 270 generalization of, 46 instruction, 46–52 media and, 52 moral education and, 274 research, 43 standards, 297 teaching of, 46 in UG psychology education, 41–43 ethnicity, 56, 105 ethnocentrism, 175 EU. See European Union Eurocentrism, 80 European Credit Transfer System (ECTS), 173–74 European Diploma in Psychology (EDP), 316 European Federation of Psychology Students Associations (EFPSA), 174 European Higher Education Area (EHEA), 22, 173–74 European Union (EU), 197, 199 EUROPLAT, 197 EuroPsy, 148, 169, 316, 325–26 evaluating, 7–8 evidence investigation of, 31 values development and, 154 evidence-based practice, 98, 160 Boulder model and, 146 of medicine, 33 evolution, 254, 257 exchange programs, 174 exclusion, 74–75 extraversion, 212 extremism, 308 Eysenck, Hans, 211–12

Eysenck, Sybil, 211–12 Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), 211–12 Facebook, 157 faculty character strengths, 301–2 renewal, 296–97 virtues, 300–301 faith, 302 families, extended, 254 farming, 222 Fechner, Gustave Theodore, 182 feedback, 114, 231, 289 field supervisors, 48 fieldwork, 171 films, 155, 231 First Nations concept, 85 First Principles, 273, 275 First Year Experience Report, 93–94 fishing industry, 224–26 flexibility, in critical thinking, 35 folkways, 21 food miles, 232 foreign language skills, 214 Fowler, Ray, 178, 189 freedom, 214 free recall, 34 Freud, Sigmund, vii–viii Gaarder, Jostein, 51 Gajah Mada University, 179 games, 212 Gandadiputra, Mulyono, 181 Gardner, Howard, 122 Garvey, Darren, 79–82 GCE. See General Certificate of Education GCSE. See General Certificate of Secondary Education Gelganyem Youth and Community Wellbeing Programme, 85 gender, 105 General Certificate of Education (GCE), 194, 195t General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE), 191, 194, 195t genetics, 251–52, 257

Index

genocide, 73 global citizenry, 4, 235 adaptive cognition and, 259 applied positive psychology and, 125 concept of, 9–10 definition of, 62 diversity and, 8, 10, 21 higher education and, 96–99 human ecology and, 256 intercultural understanding and, 42 psychologically literate, 56 global issues, 245–46, 332 adaptive cognition and, 261 applied psychology and, 147 citizenship and, 200 textbooks and, 198–99 globalization, 98, 127 global mobility, 327 global perspectives, 15, 21–22 goals in department planning, 261 learning, 18t, 23 setting, 283 of UG psychology education, 264 Golose, Petrus, 185t good character, 49–51 good conduct, 43–44, 264 good life, 120 Goodstein, Leonard, 311 governance, 274 graduate attributes, 4–5, 63, 111 adaptive cognition and, 262 applied psychology and, 146–48 graduate education, 133–38, 142–44 alumni, 313 Boulder model and, 146 growth in, 314f–315f research in, 282 US, 325 gratitude, 302 gratitude letter, 264 Great Barrier Reef, 257 green office principles, 229–30 Gross, Martin, 309 group discussion, 18, 149 diversity in, 111–12 ethics instruction and, 47 group dynamics, 296, 299

345

group identity, 59–60, 226 group work, 263 Guidelines for Undergraduate Psychology Programs, 131 Gulf of Mexico, 256 Gunarsa, Singgih, 181 H1N1 virus, 239 habit, 274 Halpern, Diane, 4, 6, 131, 296 Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment, 33–34, 37–38 Handayani, Christina, 184t Handbook for Enhancing Undergraduate Education in Psychology (McGovern), 4 Handoyo, Seger, 184t Happier (Ben-Shahar), 126 happiness, 122, 257–58 Harré, Niki, 224–26 Harvard University, 120 Hassan, Fuad, 180–81 HDI. See Human Development Index healthcare, 234–39, 245, 257 Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act, 77, 92 health practitioners, 92, 147 hedonistic utilitarianism, 45 Helton, William, 222, 223 hierarchical power structure, 277 higher education in Australia, 91–92 efficiency in, 269 global citizenry and, 96–99 Indigenous studies in, 79 professional, 208–10 restructuring of, 37 in Russia, 208–10 Higher Education Research Institute, 112 higher-order analysis, 153 high school, Russian, 206–7 Hippocrates-Galen temperaments, 212 historical accounts, 255–56 Hitchcock, Alfred, vii honesty, 302 honors students, 316 hope, 302

346

Hope Theory, 126 How People Learn (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking), 287 How Students Learn (Donovan & Bransford), 287 human behavior. See behavior Human Development Index (HDI), 236 human ecology, 255–56 human factors, 235 humanism, 214 humanities, 48–49, 312 humanity, 298, 300 human optimization approach, 257–58 human rights, 72 humility, 302 humor, 302 Hunter, Ernest, 77 hypothesis testing, 33 IAPT. See Increasing Access to Psychological Therapy IB program. See International Baccalaureate program ICOPE. See International Conference of Psychology Education ideal utilitarian, 44–45 ideological extremism, 254 IGRCC program. See Intergroup Relations, Community, and Conflict program IHEAC. See Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council imagined contact, 156 incarceration rates, 240 Increasing Access to Psychological Therapy (IAPT), 200–201 Indigenous Australians, 72–77 Indigenous Health Curriculum Framework, 79 Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council (IHEAC), 79 indigenous peoples, 72, 256 Indigenous studies, 79 individual differences, 193 individualism, 83 individual psychological culture of behavior, 207 individual research thesis, 325, 331

Index

Indonesia, 178–80, 189, 324 history of psychology of, 182f journal articles of, 186t–187t industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology, 308 industry, 309 infants, institutionalization of, 199 inferences, 272 information discriminating, 139 domain-specific, 28 evaluation of, 153, 272 Internet and, 28 literacy, 330 management, 132, 136t, 141 proliferation, 98 technology, 20 informed iterative development, 290–91 ingroup/outgroup thinking, 254–55 ingroups, 56, 254–55 insight, 140 institutionalization, of infants, 199 instructional design, 282, 287–88 instrumental reasoning, 274–75 integration, 291 integrative experiences, 16 integrity, 302 intellectual development, 269 intellectual maps, 282 intelligence, 273–74, 302 intentional reflection, 262 interaction diversity, 109–10 interaction skills, 132, 136t–137t intercultural understanding, 42 interdisciplinary approaches, 222 interdisciplinary coursework, 22 interdisciplinary teams, 19 intergroup bias, 56, 63–67 intergroup contact paradigm, 58–59 intergroup harmony exercises, 62–68 psychological literacy and, 60–61 psychologically literate global citizens and, 62 teaching of, 68–69 trends to improve, 57–61 intergroup questionnaire, 65t–66t

Index

Intergroup Relations, Community, and Conflict (IGRCC) program, 113 International Association of Applied Psychology, 178 International Baccalaureate, Diplomas, and Foundation degrees, 191–92 International Baccalaureate (IB) program, 313–16 International Conference of Psychology Education (ICOPE), 86 internationalization, 98–99 International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED), 316 international study, 202 Internet, 214, 239 extended contact and, 58 learning management systems and, 101 online education and, 94 scams, 28 usage, 27–28 interpersonal relationships, 235 interviewing skills, 157 intuition, 31, 132–33 intuitionism, 45 inventories, 263 I-O psychology. See industrialorganizational psychology IQ tests, 178 Iraq War, 200 Irmawati, 184t ISCED. See International Standard Classification of Education Italy, 167–69 James, William, 182 Janis, Irving, x Jones, Reginald Lanier, 80 journal articles, Indonesian, 186t–187t journalism, 309 Journal of Social Psychology, 186t journals, reflective, 51, 159–60 judgment, 33, 301 just community, 273–75 justice, 298, 301. See also social justice citizenship and, 9, 125 cultivating, 273–75

347

kami, 180n2 Kebayoran Baru, 183 kekitaan, 181n2 King, Martin Luther, Jr., 270 Kintgen, Eugene, 7 kita, 181n2 Kita dan Kami, the Two Basic Modes of Togetherness (Hassan), 180 knowledge, 300. See also psychological knowledge basic competencies and, 170 categories of, 329 civic, 286 conceptual, 329 content, 30 domain, 8 ethical, 8 factual, 329 intercultural, 286 metacognitive, 7, 329 procedural, 329 public, 318 technology and, 148–49 transfer, 35–36 types of, 7 workers, 28 Kohlberg, Lawrence, 274 Kowalski, Robin M., 82 Kwantlen Polytechnic University, 235 laboratory techniques, 151 Labor Department, 310 labs first-year, 224–26 in Russian UG psychology education, 210–11 social dilemmas, 222 third-year, 226–29 language development, 210, 254 law, 309 leadership skills, 109, 114, 237 learning. See also service-learning; student learning outcomes; work-integrated learning active, 167, 171 activities, 210–11, 287–88 disposition for, 34–35 experiential, 126

Index

348

learning (Contd.) goals, 18t, 23 independent, 159 intergroup harmony exercises and, 63 liberal, 296, 303 lifelong, viii, 98, 281, 286, 297, 302 love of, 301–2 management systems, 101 matrix of, 286 psychological literacy, 201–2 service, 236–37, 275–77 social interaction in, 100 theories, 105–6 transdisciplinary, 261 work-based, 198 learning and teaching (L&T) strategies, 146 effectiveness of, 160 student-centered, 148 learning outcomes. See student learning outcomes lectures active learning and, 171 on cognitive fallacies, 153 practical, 81 in Russian UG psychology education, 210–11 legislative frameworks, 158 Lewis, C. S., 273 life expectancy, 257 life scripts, 212 likelihood, 33 Likert-type scale, 227 listening, 157 literacy, 4. See also ethical literacy; psychological literacy civic, 284 concept of, 6–9 cultural, 7 definition of, 29 digital, 198 ecological, 221–22 information, 330 medical, 236, 238 scientific, 7–9 statistical, 238 technological, 20 “Literacy Literacy” (Kintgen), 7

Liu, James, 223 LLP Erasmus Program, 174 Locke, John, 181 longitudinal studies, 115 love, 179, 301–2 L&T strategies. See learning and teaching strategies Lyubomirsky, Sonja, 126 Mamoto, Benny Jozua, 185t management systems, 101 marriage, 179 Massaro, Dominic, 98 masters programs, 313 in Italy, 167 in positive psychology, 121, 124 professional higher education and, 208 materialism, 255 McClure, John, 223 McGovern, Thomas, 4 Mead, Andrea, 224–26 measures, 231, 284–87. See also assessments of psychological literacy, 114 media, 179 drug abuse and, 241 ethics and, 52 medical humanities, 48–49 medicine, 33, 237–39, 309 meditation, 258 Meehl, Paul, x melanoma, 238–39 memorization, ix memory, 34 mental health conceptualizing, 201 disease model of, 76 improving, 121 of Indigenous Australians, 74–77 issues, 257 positive psychology and, 119 professionals, 325 screening, 124 unemployment and, 200–201 mental illness, 121, 179 mental models, 7 metacognition, 36, 158, 251, 257 metacognitive monitoring, 34, 36

Index

Michigan Student Study (MSS), 113 Milfont, Taciano L., 223 military, 179 Miller, George, x mindfulness, 35 Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, 213, 216 Ministry of Fisheries, 224 minority influence, 112 mirror-drawing task, 211 mission statements, 23 mobility, 167, 173–75, 327 modesty, 302 modularization, 201 Monash University, 121 monitoring, continuous, 288–90 moral accountability, 274 agency, 46 character, 271–73 concern, 228 decision making, 44–45 education, 271–74 order, 273–74 philosophy, 40 reasoning, 271 skepticism, 45 theory, 50 values, 273 MRI scans, 199 MSS. See Michigan Student Study Mukadis, Sartono, 181 multiculturalism, 57 in Canada, 234–36, 243–45 diversity and, 243–45 multidisciplinary approaches, 224 Mulyadi, Seto, 181 Mulyono, Agus, 185t Munandar, A. S., 181 Munandar, U. C., 181 Münsterberg, Hugo, 182 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey: Australia, 2004-05, 74 National Conference on Undergraduate Education in Psychology, 4, 16–17, 328

349

National Health Service (NHS), 200 nationalism, 192 National Practice Standards for the Mental Health Workforce, 78 National Standards for High School Psychology, 131 natural moral order, 273–74 needle exchange sites, 240–42 negative reinforcement, 138 negative thoughts, 264 neuroscience, 22 neuroticism, 212 New Zealand, 221, 223–32 New Zealand Climate Change Institute, 229 NHS. See National Health Service Nichomachean Ethics (Aristotle), 298, 301 Niemiec, Ryan, 126 NIMBY responses. See “not in my backyard” responses Nimpuno, John S., 181 non-critical thinking, 31 normative relativism, 45 “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) responses, 30 nous, 274 numerus clausus, 167 nursing, 32–33 Obama, Barack, 10–11 Occupational Outlook Handbooks, 310 OCED. See Organization for Economic Growth and Development O’Connor, Sandra Day, 107 oppression, 75 optimal functioning, 122 optimism, 302 order, 274 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 91–92 organizational change, 222 Organization for Economic Growth and Development (OCED), 242 Orr, David, 222 outgroups, 56, 58, 254–55 over-analysis, risk of, viii

350

Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage Report, 74 Packard, Vance, 309 Padjadjaran University, 179–80 palmistry, 31–32 pandemics, 239 paradigm shift, 80 Pavlov, Ivan Petrovich, 182 Paxinos, George, 256–57 pedagogical approaches, 84–86, 216, 245, 260–62, 301 pedagogy, 328–31 global issues and, 245 in Russia, 209 tuning of, 327 peer pressure, 255 perceptual biases, 139 personal action, 222 personal conduct, 44 personal development, 172–73 personal growth, 207 personality characteristics, 214 personality dimensions, 211–12 perspective-taking, 271 Peterson, Christopher, 122, 298 philosophy, 40, 309 physical exercise, 214 physical health, of Indigenous Australians, 74–75 Piaget, Jean, 269 Piagetian stages, viii Pickett, Harry, 79–82 pluralistic orientation, 114 police, 179 politics, 222, 309 Politics (Aristotle), 301 pollution, 220 positive psychology, 119–20, 257–58, 296, 298 in academia, 120–21 applied, 123, 125–26 capstone courses and, 124 commercialization of, 123 courses, 126 developing psychological literacy and, 121–22 globalization and, 127

Index

masters programs, 121, 124 psychologically literate citizens and, 125–26 strategies, 264 Positive Psychology at the Movies (Niemiec & Wedding), 126 positive psychology interventions (PPIs), 123–25 “Positive Psychology Network Paper” (Seligman), 120 positivity strategies, 258 possums, 229 postmodernism, 309–10 power, 82–83 PPIs. See positive psychology interventions pragmatic hermeneutics, 48 prejudice, 56, 155 definition of, 57 racial, 57–61 recognizing, 62, 68–69 reducing, 57–58 prima facie duty, 44–45 Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology, 328 prior experiences, 105 problem solving, 33, 95, 102 collaborative, 296 diversity and, 244–45 in first-year student experience, 100 persistence in, 35 practical application of, 96 socially responsible, 23 processes, types of, 7–8 professional boundaries, 324 professional codes, 44 professional outcomes, 214 professional skills, 150, 235 professional training, 208–10, 260–62 program mission, 23 Project DARE, 239–40 projective tests, 180 prudence, 302 Psi Beta, 317 Psi Chi, 311, 313f, 314f–315f, 316–17 “Psikologi untuk Anda” (television show), 181 psychiatry, 179

Index

psychoanalysis, 212 psychodiagnostic methods, 214 psychological culture, 207 psychological distress, 74, 124 psychological frameworks, 140–41 psychological knowledge, 3, 148–50, 207 acquisition of, 15 applying, 20–21 contextualizing, 209 sharing, 126–27 used adaptively, 8 psychological literacy, vii, 4–6, 281 abilities involved in, 93 assessment of, 37–38 capstone courses and, 20–21 components of, 31f concept of, 6–9 conceptual underpinnings of, 29–30 critical thinking and, 30–36 culture as, 79–86 curriculum and, 17–23 definition of, 191 describing, 20–21 development, 121–22, 138, 259f distinguishing between general and professional, 216–17 diversity and, 105, 111–13 domains of expertise in, 132, 134t–137t faculty virtues for, 300–301 first-year student experience and, 92–96 future of, 216 healthcare and, 238–39 in high school, 206–7 intergroup harmony and, 60–61 learning, 201–2 levels of, 259–60 longitudinal studies of, 115 measures of, 114 need for, 27–29 outlook for, 316–18 pedagogical approach and, 260–62 perspectives on, 322–24 portfolios, 159–60 priority of, 99 as process, 168–69 promotion, 15, 22–23, 323

351

quality of, 96 research, 98 in Russian UG psychology education, 210–13 scientific reasoning and, 36–37 self-report measures of, 98 skills, 269–70 student virtues for, 299–300 support for, 115 teaching of, 20–21 in UG psychology education, 96–97 in UK, 191–94, 197–98 understanding of, 20–21 psychologically literate citizens, 3–6, 168, 192, 296 adaptive cognition and, 259 character and, 270 concept of, 9–10 developmental psychology and, 252 diversity and, 113–14 in first-year student experience, 99–102 global citizenry and, 56 positive psychology and, 125–26 scientist-educators and, 283–91 sustainability and, 221–22 psychologically literate global citizens, 10, 56, 62, 323 psychological principles, application of, 149 psychological status, 253f psychology. See also specific disciplines of psychology abnormal, 201 application of, 158–60, 324 assumed universal application of, 75 biological, 193 breadth of, 306–7 changing nature of, 307 clinical, 209, 326 coaching, 121 cognitive, 193 community, 72, 223, 231 conservation, 242–43 courses, 21–22 critical, 72, 329 cultural, 235, 255–56 education, 209

Index

352

psychology (Contd.) environmental, 223, 226–30, 256–57 epistemology of, 203 evolutionary, 253–55 expertise in, 307 forensic, 209 hard vs. soft, 310 history of, 182f humanistic, 120 Indigenous, 100–101 international, 316 legitimacy of, 324 liberal education and, 311–12 misunderstanding of, 307 negative views of, 309–10 by non-psychologists, 182–83 organizational, 209 pop, 122–23, 192, 308 popularity of, 306 positive views of, 310–11 practical, 182 public and, 307–11 public misunderstanding of, 261 relevance of, 198–99 subjectivity of, 75–76 Psychology, 2nd Australian and New Zealand Edition (Burton, Westen, & Kowalski), 82 Psychology Board of Australia, 79, 92 psychology major, 3, 133, 142–44 application of, 29 applied psychology and, 147 motivations for, 260–61 popularity of, 323 psychology minor, 133, 140–42 psychopathology, 201, 237 psychophile, 308 psychophobe, 308 psychosocial moratorium, 106 psychotherapy, 212, 288 PsycInfo, 122, 239, 241 public, 307–11 knowledge, 318 misunderstanding, 261 past attitudes of, 308–11 reflection, 288–90 The Public and Its Problems (Dewey), 303 public service announcements, 241

PubMed, 239, 241 Puget Sound Conference, 16–17 Purdie, Nola, 82 purpose, 302 QAA. See Quality Assurance Agency Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency, 194 Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), 194–95, 196t–197t, 326 quality assurance mechanisms, 194–97, 325 quality of life, 77, 264–65 quality principles, 292–93 questions demographic, 64t empirical, 37 multiculturalism and, 245 race, 56, 104, 107–10 racism cultural, 75 towards Indigenous Australians, 73 institutionalized, 75 radical relativism, 45 rationality, 273 real-world situations, 172–73 reasoning, 168 ethical, 286 instrumental, 274–75 moral, 271 scientific, 36–37 verbal, 33 recategorization, 59–60 recognition, 34 reconstitution, 84 reflexivity, 82–84 relational asymmetries, 277 religion, 309 remembering, 7 research animal, 156 applied, 124, 152 assessments and, 286 codes, 44 collaborative, 19 competencies, 215 creative thinking in, 153–54

Index

critical qualitative, 223 critical thinking in, 154 curricula and, 19 ethically problematic, 52 ethics, 43 experience, 324 in graduate education, 282 limitations in, 198 methods, 37, 63, 150–52, 194 placements, 151–52 projects, 151–52, 152 psychological literacy, 98 qualitative approaches to, 199 quasi-experimental, 154 report writing, 157–58 skills, 8 summarizing, 158 thesis, 325, 331 research methodology and statistics (RM&S), 151 resilience, 94, 258 Review Journal of Gifted and Creativity, 186t–187t Riley, Rob, 76 RM&S. See research methodology and statistics Road to Guantanamo (film), 52 Rogers, Carl, 283 Roksa, Josipa, ix role models, ix, 99, 231, 323 role playing, 47 Rorschach test, 180 Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale, 211–12 rubrics, 286–87, 289 Rules for Accreditation and Accreditation Standards for Psychology Courses (APAC), 77 Rules for Radicals (Alinsky), 220 Russia, 206–7 educational developments in, 213–16 standards of, 213–16 UG psychology education in, 208–13 Russian Ministry of Education, 206, 213 Sadli, Saparinah, 181 safe learning environment, 100 Saint Mary’s Conference, 4, 16, 308 Santoso, Slamet Iman, 179–80, 189

353

scaffolding teaching, 84–85, 330 schemas, 7 scholarly activity, 291 scholarship, 291–92 Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) model, 292 schools, sustainable, 230–32 scientific inquiry, 283, 290 scientific method, 152–53, 199, 322 scientific literacy and, 8–9 scientific reasoning and, 36–37 scientific persuasion, 139 scientific reasoning, 36–37 scientist-educators, ix, 281–82 model, 282–83 psychologically literate citizens and, 283–91 scholarship and, 291–92 scientist-practitioner model, 92 Scott, Britain, 243 Scottish High Still, 191 seafood, 224 secondary school, 313–16 Second Life, 157 segregation, 61 self-analysis, 214 self-awareness, 36, 93–95, 272 self-cognition exercises, 211–12 self-confidence, 237 self-control, 272, 302 self-correction, 35 self determination, 77 Self-Determination Theory, 126 self-education, 189 self-efficacy, 169 self-evaluation, 207 self-examination, 207 self-help, 308 self-knowledge, 258 adaptive cognition and, 262 through inventories, 263 self-monitoring, 272 self-reflection, 36, 49, 158 essays, 101–2 in first-year student experience, 99 good character and, 49–50 service learning and, 276 value of, 169

354

self-regulation, 36, 158, 207, 214, 271, 302 self-report measures, 98 self-understanding, 159, 207, 211 Seligman, Martin, 119–20, 296, 298 Sembiring, Jafar, 184t seminars, 210–11 sense of belonging, 94 service-learning, 236–37, 275–77 The Shape of the River (Bowen & Bok), 113 Shepard, Roger, x Silverius, Y. Soeharso, 184t Simon, Herbert, x SIT. See Social Identity Theory skeptical inquiry, 152 skepticism, 301–2 moral, 45 psychology major and, 142 purpose of, 139 Skinner, B. F., vii, 251, 257, 283 SLOs. See student learning outcomes social awareness, 111 social biases, 139 social change, 82, 86–87, 232 social comparison, 255 social conventions, 80 social debates, 19 social demonstration, 51 social dilemmas, 222, 224 Social Identity Theory (SIT), 56 social inclusion, 56, 62, 69, 98–99 education, 60–61 strategy, 97 social intelligence, 302 social interaction, 100 socialization process, 84 social justice, 72 action and, 285 cultural competence and, 74 perspective, 86 social media networks, 28 social psychology, 56, 193, 200 cultural psychology as opposed to, 255 intergroup harmony exercises for, 62–68 in Russian UG psychology education, 209

Index

social responsibility, 73, 197–98, 290, 296, 302 cultivating, 275 efficiency and, 270 problem solving and, 23 social support, 330 social work, 309 societal constraints, 325 Society for the Teaching of Psychology, 325 sociocultural experiences, 139 sociology, 22 Socrates, 181, 258 Soffat, Charletty Choesyana, 185t solidarity, 277 Sonn, Christopher, 80 Sophie’s World (Gaarder), 51 SoTL model. See Scholarship of Teaching and Learning model spatial optimism, 254 speaking, 18–19 specialization, 209–10 species, 256 speculation, 153 Spellbound (film), vii standards educational, 317 ethical, 297 Russian, 213–16 statistical inference, 37 statistics, 19 human descriptive, 152 qualitative approach to, 199 training, 151 stereotypes, 59, 95, 228 Stolte, Ottilie, 223 structural diversity, 107–14 structure training, 34 student learning outcomes (SLOs), 4 adaptive cognition and, 262–63 application of psychology and, 158–59 appropriate, 98 assessment of, 23 communication skills development and, 156–57 critical thinking skills and, 15 curricula and, 17–21

Index

definition of, 17 diversity and, 107, 113 of intergroup harmony exercises, 63 knowledge and understanding of psychology and, 148 progressive development of, 148 for psychology major, 142–44 for psychology minor, 141–42 research methods and, 150–51 scientist-educator model and, 282 student-appointed, 99 values development and, 154–55 students achievement, 289 diversity among, 84 engagement, 110, 112, 330 ethical behavior of, 21 first-year, 92–96, 99–102 graduate school-bound, 142–44 honors, 316 terminal baccalaureate, 142–44 transition, 93–94, 96, 102 virtues, 299–300 study skills, 207, 263–64 subject matter content, 329 Sukaji, Sutarlinah, 181 Supreme Court, 107 sustainability, 220–22 advocacy, 232 in Canada, 234–36, 242–43, 245 environmental psychology courses and, 229–30 teaching, 223–32 sustained renewal, 299, 302 syllabus construction, 299 symbol analysts, 28 Talloires Declaration, 229 Tamar, Mohamad, 185t Tao, 273 Tarozzi, Massimiliano, 171 TAT. See Thematic Apperception Test teaching character strengths for, 298–99 collaborative, 19 commitment to, 288 competencies, 215 continuing development of, 299

355

of critical thinking, 32, 34 culture as psychological literacy, 79–86 effectiveness of, 289, 293 ethical practices for, 297–98 of ethics, 46 implications of ethical literacy for, 50–51 improvement of, 288–89 informed iterative development of, 290–91 of intergroup harmony, 68–69 mission, 216 of psychological literacy, 20–21 quality principles for, 292–93 role of, 209 scaffolding, 84–85 scholarly activity and, 291 sustainability, 223–32 Teaching, Learning and Assessing in Developmentally Coherent Curriculum, 131–32 Teaching of Psychology, 287 Teaching Psychology for Sustainability (Scott), 243 technology advancement of, 98 communication, 157, 254 information, 20 information management and, 132 knowledge and, 148–49 literacy, 20 psychology major and, 143 television, 181 Television of the Republic of Indonesia (TVRI), 181 temperance, 298, 300–301 tertiary education. See higher education textbooks, 198–99 Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), 180 thinking. See also critical thinking creative, 153–54 culture of, 207 ingroup/outgroup, 255 irrational, 254 negative, 264 non-critical, 31 scientific, 214 values-based, 222

356

third sector products, 172 thought development, 210 three blessings, 264 tobacco, 240 “The Today Show with Kathie Lee and Hoda,” 35 Torres Strait Islander people, 72–73. See also Indigenous Australians tragedy of the commons, 224–26 Transactional Analysis of Berne, 212 transcendence, 298, 301 transcontextual transfer, 34 transportation, sustainable, 232 Trudeau, Pierre, 243 Tuning Project, 174, 326 Tversky, Amos, x TVRI. See Television of the Republic of Indonesia UCLA. See University of California, Los Angeles UG psychology education. See undergraduate psychology education UK. See United Kingdom UK Benchmarking Exercise, 148 UN. See United Nations uncertainty, 33 UNDA. See University of Notre Dame undergraduate (UG) psychology education alumni, 312–13 applied psychology and, 147 call to reform, 28 Canadian, 235 developments in, in Russia, 213–16 diversity and, 104–5 epistemology of psychology and, 203 ethics in, 41–43 goals of, 264 growth in, 314f–315f implications of ethical literacy for, 50–51 integrative approach to, 251, 257–60 intergroup harmony exercises in, 62–68

Index

international models of, 324–28 liberal, 208–10 pedagogical approach to, 260–62 professional, 208–10 psychological literacy in, 96–97 purpose of, 5 Russian, 208–16 Undergraduate Psychology Education: A Blueprint for the Future of the Discipline (Halpern), 4, 6 unemployment, 200–201 UNESCO. See United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UniSA. See University of South Australia United Kingdom (UK), 326 attributes of education in, 194–97 citizenship in, 191–94 curricula in, 198–201 psychological literacy in, 191–94, 197–98 United Nations (UN), 236, 242 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 6 United States (US), 316, 325 University of Aberdeen, 198 University of Auckland, 223 University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), 112 University of California, Santa Cruz, 98 University of Canterbury, 223, 227 University of East London, 121 University of Indonesia, 178–80, 184t–185t University of Michigan, 107, 113 University of New South Wales, 10 University of Notre Dame (UNDA), 84–86 University of Pennsylvania, 121 University of Puget Sound, 4, 16–17, 296, 328 University of South Australia (UniSA), 84 University of Southern Queensland, 100–101 University of Sydney, 121

Index

University of Trento, 171 University of Waikato, 223 University of Wollongong, 121 University of Wolverhampton, 198 US. See United States Vaillant, George, 122 values, 10, 132, 134t–135t development, 154–56 human-focused, 221 humanistic, 214 intergroup harmony exercises and, 63 moral, 273 orientations, 207 systems, 82 verbal reasoning skills, 33 Victoria International Development Education Association, 62 Victoria University, 223, 229–30 virtues, 121, 125, 297 for citizenship, 299–301 classical, 45, 49–50 faculty, 300–301 habit and, 274 moral character and, 271 for psychological literacy, 299–301 student, 299–300 sustainability of, 303 for teaching, 298–99 theory, 49 universal, 298 Visible Language, 7 vitality, 302 vocabulary, 210 The Vocation of a Teacher (Booth), 303 voice, 83 volunteerism, 51, 193, 236–37 Canada and, 234–36, 245 Walker, Roz, 82 War on Drugs, 239–40

357

Wartegg drawing completion test, 180 Watson, John, vii Ways Forward report, 76 Webb, Anita, 309 Wedding, Danny, 126 well-being, 77, 121, 168 community, 84 HDI and, 236 pop psychology and, 122 societal, 258 Westen, Drew, 82 whaling, 226–29 whiteness, 80 Wigmore, John Henry, 309 WIL. See work-integrated learning wisdom, 298, 300 work experience, 51, 170, 202 Working Together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Mental Health and Wellbeing Principles and Practices (Purdie, Dudgeon, & Walker), 82 Working with Indigenous Australians: A Handbook for Psychologists (Dudgeon, Garvey, & Pickett), 79–82 work-integrated learning (WIL), 51, 160, 263 work placements, 202 workplace practicum, 235 world education philosophies, 217 World Health Organization, 237 writing, 17–18, 156–57 report, 157–58, 235 Wundt, Wilhelm, 182 Zajonc, Bob, x zest, 302 Zimbardo, Phil, ix Zubaidi, Ahmad, 184t

The Psychologically Literate Citizen: Foundations and Global Perspectives

Rationality and the Literate Mind

America the Literate

Literate programming

America the Literate

Disability and the Life Course: Global Perspectives

Literate Programming

Literate programming

Community Theatre: Global Perspectives

Volcanoes: Global Perspectives

Global Governance: Critical Perspectives

Pharmaceutical systems: global perspectives

Global Perspectives on Constitutional Law (Global Perspectives Series)

Seychelles Global Citizen: The Autobiography of the Founding President

Chance in physics: Foundations and perspectives

Literate programming in XML

Global Warming and Climate Change (Science Foundations)

Global Politics (Palgrave Foundations Series)

Foundations of Global Genetic Optimization

Hobbes: On the Citizen

Social Justice and Neoliberalism: Global Perspectives

M-commerce: Global Experiences And Perspectives

Ethical Leadership: Global Challenges and Perspectives

Contending Perspectives on Global: Coherence and Contestation

Foundations of global nonlinear analysis

Building Feminist Movements and Organizations: Global Perspectives

Transport and Tourism: Global Perspectives, Third ed

Rethinking Gandhi and Nonviolent Relationality: Global Perspectives

Artifact The Last Citizen

Science for the Citizen

Artifact [The Last Citizen]

The Psychologically Literate Citizen: Foundations and Global Perspectives

Rationality and the Literate Mind

America the Literate

Literate programming

America the Literate

Disability and the Life Course: Global Perspectives

Literate Programming

Literate programming

Community Theatre: Global Perspectives

Volcanoes: Global Perspectives

Global Governance: Critical Perspectives

Pharmaceutical systems: global perspectives

Global Perspectives on Constitutional Law (Global Perspectives Series)

Seychelles Global Citizen: The Autobiography of the Founding President

Chance in physics: Foundations and perspectives

Literate programming in XML

Global Warming and Climate Change (Science Foundations)

Global Politics (Palgrave Foundations Series)

Foundations of Global Genetic Optimization

Hobbes: On the Citizen

Social Justice and Neoliberalism: Global Perspectives

M-commerce: Global Experiences And Perspectives

Ethical Leadership: Global Challenges and Perspectives

Contending Perspectives on Global: Coherence and Contestation

Foundations of global nonlinear analysis

Building Feminist Movements and Organizations: Global Perspectives

Transport and Tourism: Global Perspectives, Third ed

Rethinking Gandhi and Nonviolent Relationality: Global Perspectives

Artifact The Last Citizen

Science for the Citizen

Artifact [The Last Citizen]

Recommend Documents