Course Readings
Organizational Meeting:
Complete the online Training to Serve modules and quizzes (click
here)
Week 1: APA Guidelines for Student Learning Outcomes in Psychology.
Take a look at these readings on department goals and student learning
outcomes in psychology. Review the
the revised APA guidelines and the version created for the WSU
Psychology
department. Be prepared to talk
about the strengths and
weakness of
each analysis and its viability for effective assessment. Seriously, I
want
to hear your opinion about what we have done in the dept and what you think of our analysis.
American Psychological Association. (2013). The APA Guidelines for the
Undergraduate Psychology Major
Version 2.0. Washington, DC: Author.
Retrieved from
http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf
Amsel, E. (2012). Assessment Report: Psychology Department 2012-2013.
Unpublished paper (get
file)
Amsel, E. (2013). Assessment Report: Psychology Department 2013-2014.
Unpublished paper (get
file)
Week 2: Introductory Psychology: Achievement and Memory
Here is evidence of what is learned in Intro Psych and what kinds of
variables predict it.
Thompson, R., A. & Zamboanga, B., L. & (2004). Academic aptitude and prior
knowledge as predictors of student
achievement in Introduction to Psychology.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 778–784. (get
file)
VanderStoep, S.W., Fagerlin. A., & Feenstra, J.S. (2000). What do students
remember from introductory psychology?
Teaching of Psychology, 27, 89-92.
(get file)
Zamboanga, B., L. & Thompson, R., A. (2003). Prior knowledge and its
relevance to student achievement in Introduction to
Psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30,
96-101. (get file)
Barber, M. (2010). Students‟ prior knowledge, ability, motivation, test
anxiety, and course engagement as predictors of
learning in community college Psychology courses. Dissertation, University of
North Florida (get file),
Skim this longish but
thorough study.
Week 3: The Science of Learning and Teaching Psychology
A new ebook was published on the topic of the science of learning and
teaching undergraduate psychology.
We will review the ToC to decide on what we should read.
Benassi, V. A., Overson, C. E., & Hakala, C. M. (2014). Applying science of
learning in education: Infusing
psychological science into the curriculum. Retrieved from the Society for the
Teaching of Psychology web site. (get
book)
Week 4: Conceptual Change Approaches to Teaching.
This week we review a popular theory of learning science,
called Conceptual Change, which likens the
process of change in science to the process of learning
scientific ideas. It assumes that
students are like
scientists having to change their network of concepts and
causal beliefs in going from one
theoretical framework to another. As you do the readings this week,
consider whether your learning of
psychology has the properties of conceptual change. For a video
introduction to the topic, watch
http://mfeldstein.com/why-big-data-mostly-cant-help-improve-teaching.
Carey, S. (2000). Science education as conceptual change. Journal of
Applied Developmental Psychology, 21
13-19. (get
file)
Nersessian, N. (1989) Conceptual change in science and in science education.
Synthese, 80, 163-184.
(get file)
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982).
Accommodation of a scientific conception:
Towards a theory of conceptual change.
Science Education, 66, 211-227. (get
file)
Week 5: Conceptual Change in Psychology
The readings this week look at how conceptual change theory applies to
students learning psychology. As you
read the material consider whether the kinds of transformation discussed in
understanding of physics and
biology really apply to psychological ideas. Is there evidence of
incommensurability in psychology that there is
in the physics and biology? You might even want to think about the history
of psychology and whether psychology
shows anything parallel to the Newton - Einstein transition in physics?
Hughes, S., Lyddy, F., & Lambe, S. (2013). Misconceptions about psychological
science: A review. Psychology Learning
and Teaching, 12, 20-31. (get
file)
McDevitt, T. M. & Ormrod J. E. (2008). Fostering conceptual change
about child development in prospective teachers and
other college students. Child Development Perspectives, 2, 85–91.
(get
file)
Taylor, A. K., & Kowalski, P. (2013). Student misconceptions: Where do
they come from and what can we do?
In V.A. Benassi, C.E. Overson, & C.M. Hakala (Eds.). Applying science of
learning in education: Infusing
psychological science into the curriculum. Retrieved from the Society for the
Teaching of Psychology web
site: http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/asle2014/index.php
Some Follow-up Possibilities:
Measuring Misconceptions in Psychology
The misconceptions literature is big and (I find) largely unconvincing
in its demonstration of deep,
meaningful, and reliable misconceptions which
address underlying alternative conceptions of mind.
Take a look at these
readings asking yourself whether the misconceptions are out of ignorance or
reflective of an an alterative folk psychological conception of mind
Gardner, R. M., & Dalsing, S. (1986). Misconceptions about psychology among college
students. Teaching of
Psychology, 13, 32-34. (get
file).
Kowalski, P., & Taylor, A.K. (2006). Ability and critical thinking as
predictors of change in students'
psychological misconceptions. Journal of
Instructional Psychology, 31, 297-303. (get
file)
McCutcheon, L. E. (1991). A new test of misconceptions about psychology.
Psychological Reports,
68, 647-653. (get
file)
McCutcheon, L. E., Apperson, J. M., Hanson, E., & Wynn, V. (1992).
Relationships among critical
thinking skills, academic achievement, and
misconceptions about psychology. Psychological Reports,
71, 635–639. (get
file)
Misconceptions about Biological and Cognitive Processes in Psychology
There may be specific misconceptions about cognitive and biological
processes that do go to
alternative view of mind as dualistic and intentional
rather than as monistic and material. These
are really interesting
findings but need to be more carefully replicated, particularly the vision work.
Fahrenberg, J. & Cheetham M. (2000). The mind-body problem as seen by
students of different disciplines.
Journal of Consciousness Studies, 7,
47-59. (get file)
Gregg, V.R., Winer, G. A., Cottrell, J.E., Hedman, K.E., Fournier, J.S.
(2001). The persistence of a
misconception about vision after educational interventions.
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 622-626.
(get file)
Stanovich, K. E., (1989). Implicit philosophies of mind: The
dualism scale and its relation to religiosity and
a belief in ESP. The Journal of Psychology, 123, 5-23. (get file)
Svensen, K. G., White, K. D., & Caird, D. (1992). Dualistic belief,
personality, religiosity, and paranormal
belief in Australian students. The
Journal of Psychology, 126, 445-447. (get
file)
Misconceptions about Science and Scientific Psychology
Amsel, E., Baird, T., & Ashley, A., (2011) Misconceptions and conceptual
change in undergraduate students' understanding of psychology as a science.
Psychology Learning & Teaching 10 (1), 3-10
Friedrich, J. (1996). Assessing students’ perceptions of psychology as a
science. Validation of a self-report
measure. Teaching of Psychology, 23,
6-13. (get
file)
Thoermer, C., &, Sodian, B., (2002). Science undergraduates’ and
graduates' epistemologies of science:
The notion of interpretive frameworks. New Ideas in Psychology 20, 263–283 (get file)
Week 7: Refutation Teaching and Conceptual Change.
Kowalski, P., & Taylor, A. K. (2009). The effect
of refuting misconceptions in the introductory
psychology class.
Teaching of
Psychology, 36, 153-159.
(
get
file)
Lilienfeld, S. O. (2010). Confronting
psychological misconceptions in the classroom:
Challenges and rewards. APS
Observer, 23(17), 36-39. (get
file)
Miller, R. L., Wozniak, W. J., Rust, M. R.,
Miller, B. R., & Slezak, J. (1996).
Counterattitudinal advocacy as a means
of enhancing instructional effectiveness: How to
teach students what they do not want to know. Teaching
of
Psychology, 23(4), 215-219. (get
file)
Koslowski, P., & Taylor, A.K. (2006). Ability
and critical thinking as predictors of change in
students' psychological misconceptions.
Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31,
297-303. (get
file)
Week 8: Critique of Conceptual Change
Dunbar, K., Fugelsang, J., & Stein, C. (in press). Do naïve theories ever go
away? In M. Lovett, & P. Shah (Eds.), Thinking with
Data: 33rd Carnegie
Symposium on Cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(get
file)
Griggs, R. A., & Ransdell, S. E. (1987). Misconceptions tests or misconceived
tests? Teaching of Psychology, 14, 210-214. (get
file)
Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A. & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions
reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition.
The
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 115-163. (get
file).
Week 9: Learning Psychology and Overcoming Folk Theories of Mind
One of my complaints about the the conceptual change model is that
is does not explains how the
learning takes place and so provides no basis for setting and assessing meaningful
and possible goals.
Consider an
analogy with setting health goals (optimizing cardio-vascular, digestive,
neurological, reparatory, etc.
systems) without a basic knowledge of biological process underlying the
systems. The health goals may never
be realized because of unknown genetic, physiological, or environmental
constraints on the systems. Indeed,
even attempting to realize such health goals may be deleterious to one's health!
This week's readings sketch
out my very preliminary thinking about the general learning processes underlying
getting students to think like
psychologists.
Amsel, E., & Kay, T. (2010). After introductory psychology: The next course preparing psychology
freshmen and
sophomores for undergraduate research. In R. Miller, B. Beins, B.
Rycek, M. Ware, E. Balcetis, R. Smith, & S.
Burns (Eds.) Promoting the
undergraduate research experience in psychology. (get
file)
Amsel, E. (2009a). Teaching
psychology students to think like
psychologists. Proceedings of the
Fifth Annual Science
Education at the Crossroads Conference. (get
file)
Amsel, E. (2009b). Three pedagogical themes.
Psychology Teachers Network. A
newsletter for the APA
Education
Directorate. (get
file)
Amsel, E., Johnston, A., Alvarado, E., Kettering*, J., Rankin, R., & Ward,
M. (2009c). The effect of perspective on
misconceptions in psychology: A test of
conceptual change theory. The Journal of Instructional Psychology, 36,
289-296.(get
file)
Amsel, E., Ashley, A., Baird, T., & Johnston, A. (Submitted). Conceptual
change in psychology students’ acceptance
of the scientific foundation of the discipline. Psychology Learning
and Teaching.
Week 10: Apprenticeship Model of Teaching and Learning
Collins, A. (1988).
Cognitive
apprenticeship and instructional technology. Tech Report
BBN.
Collins, A.(2006).
Cognitive
apprenticeship. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge
handbook of the learning
sciences (p. 47 - 60). New York, New York,
Cambridge University Press.
Dennen, V. P. (2004).
Cognitive
apprenticeship in educational practice: research on scaffolding,
modeling, mentoring,
and coaching as instructional strategies. In
David H. Jonassen, (Ed), (2004). Handbook of research on educational
communications and technology (2nd Ed.). , (pp. 813-828). Mahwah, NJ,
US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Dennen, V. P., & Burner, K. J. (2008).
The cognitive apprenticeship
model in educational practice. In J. M. Spector, M. D.
Merrill, J.
Van Merrienboer & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on
educational communications and technology
(3rd Ed., pp. 425-439).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Week 11: Psychological Literacy: Also see
http://www.psychologicalliteracy.com/index.php/literature
This week we are reviewing a new approach to studying student outcomes in
psychology, based on the idea
of psychological literacy, an idea we are pursuing
in our research. The papers define and defend the concept
of psychological
literacy (e.g., Cranney & Dunn and McGovern et al.) and apply it to the
undergraduate
psychology curriculum (Beins et al., and Dunn et al.). Most of you
have already read Cranny and Dunn paper,
so please spend your time on the other
readings. In the McGovern paper, particularly focus on the "scenarios"
sections
as they offer some important ideas about how to more qualitatively measure
psychological literacy.
Among other topics, I would like to discuss the
qualitative vs. quantitative approaches to measuring
psychological literacy.
Beins, B. Landrum, E., & Posey, D. (2011). Specialized critical
thinking: Scientific and psychological illiteracies
(Report of Psychological
Literacy Task Force Subcommittee). (get
file)
Cranney, J., & Dunn, D. (2011). Psychological literacy and the
psychologically literate citizen: New Frontiers
for a Global Discipline.
In J. Cranney and D. Dunn (Eds.) The psychologically literate citizen:
foundations and
global perspectives (pp. 3-12). New York: Oxford University
Press. (get
file)
Dunn, D., Cautin, R. L., & Gurung, R. A. (2011). Curriculum matters:
Structure, content, and psychological literacy
In J. Cranney and D. Dunn (Eds.)
The psychologically literate citizen: foundations and global perspectives
(pp. 15-25). New York: Oxford University Press. (get
file)
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, DC: American Psychological
Association. (get
file)