468 Undergraduate Education interests: “mental measurement” by James McKeen Cattell at Pennsylvania, “psychological basis of religious faith” by William James at Harvard, and “pedagogical psychology” by Harry Kirke Wolfe at Nebraska. A common developmental pattern of future psychology curricula was captured by the Pennsylvania catalog of 1890. Unlike other universities, Penn had its own psychology de- partment; it was not a subset of philosophy or some other area. A sequence of courses was listed. Psychology 1 was a lecture course titled Elementary Psychology. Psychology 3 (no Psychology 2 was listed) was titled Experimental Psy- chology with lectures and laboratory work. Psychology 4 was titled Mental Measurement with lectures, reports, and ad- vanced work in the laboratory. “Course 4 is open only to those who have taken course 3, and will be different each year, for a series of years. Advanced Physiological Psychology is pro- posed for 1891–92, and Comparative, Social, and Abnormal Psychology for 1892–3” (University of Pennsylvania Cata- logue and Announcements 1890–1891, p. 96). McGovern (1992b) found that by 1900, at Berkeley, Brown, Cincinnati, Columbia, Cornell, George Washington, Indiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Wellesley, Wis- consin, and Yale, the first course was followed by an “experi- mental psychology” course. Laboratory work was required in either this course or in an additional course sometimes titled “laboratory in psychology.” Courses titled “advanced psy- chology” or “advanced experimental” fostered students’indi- vidual research with faculty supervision. The 1900–1901 Brown catalog stated, “The aim is to make original contribu- tions to scientific knowledge in psychology and to publish the results” (Brown University Catalogue, 1900–1901, p. 57). Courses in abnormal, comparative, genetic, systematic, and psychological theory began to appear, as did more special topics courses. At Nebraska, a course in “race psychology” was listed.AtWisconsin, there was a course in “mental evolu- tion”; Part I emphasized comparative psychology and Part II emphasized anthropology. At Amherst, Cornell, and Yale, the first course in the philosophy department was an interdiscipli- nary offering that covered psychology, logic, and ethics. One of the most extensive curricula was listed at Colum- bia University in the Department of Philosophy, Psychology, Anthropology, and Education. Fifteen separate “Courses in Psychology” were listed, taught by an interdisciplinary fac- ulty. The following introductory offerings were then fol- lowed by 13 topic courses, laboratory courses, or supervised research courses: A. Elements of psychology—James’s Principles of Psychol- ogy—Discussions, practical exercises, and recitations. 3 hours. First half-year, given in 4 sections. Professor Lord. A parallel course is given by Dr. Thorndike at Teachers College. 1. Introduction to psychology. 2 hours, lectures and demon- strations. Professors Butler, Cattell, Boas, Starr, and Hyslop, Drs. Far- rand and Thorndike, and Mr. Strong. The object of this course is to give a summary view of the subject-matter and methods of modern psychology. The ground covered is as follows: A. Prolegomena to psychology, including a sketch of the history of psychology. Six lectures. Professor Butler. B. Physiological psychology. Eight lectures. Dr. Farrand. C. Experimental psychology. Eight lectures. Professor Cattell. D. Genetic psychology. Seven lectures. Dr. Thorndike. E. Comparative psychology. Seven lectures. Dr. Boas. F. Pathological psychology. Three lectures. Dr. Starr. G. General psychology. Eight lectures. Professor Hyslop. H. Philosophy of mind. Six lectures. Mr. Strong. Requisite: Psychology A, previously or simultaneously. (Columbia University in the City of New York Catalogue, 1900– 1901, p. 176) Rice’s (2000) analysis of reviews of this period by Garvey (1929) and Ruckmich (1912) suggested that five stages of institutional development for psychology departments were evident by 1900. In Stage 1, mental science or mental philos- ophy courses were being taught. In Stage 2, institutions were offering one or more courses labeled “psychology.” Stage 3 had institutions with psychological laboratories. Stage 4 de- partments were offering the PhD in psychology. Stage 5 rep- resented an independent department; Rice suggested that Clark, Columbia, Illinois, and Chicago were the only institu- tions at this level. The APA-sponsored reports by Calkins, Sanford, Seashore, and Whipple in 1910, and Henry’s (1938) exami- nation of 157 catalogs will take the reader almost to midcen- tury in describing the courses taught to undergraduate psychology students. Lux and Daniel (1978) consolidated these portraits with a table of the 30 most frequent under- graduate courses offered in 1947, 1961, 1969, and 1975. Perlman and McCann (1999a, p. 179) continued this tradition by identifying the 30 most frequently offered undergraduate courses, and the percentages of colleges requiring them, in their study of 400 catalogs for 1996–1997. Scholars from the Carnegie Foundation for the Advance- ment of Teaching (1977) aptly described the post–World War II period of curricular expansion as “the academic shop- ping center” (p. 5). Keeping in mind Veysey’s (1973) analysis of the eras of expansion and their external stimuli, psychol- ogy was benefiting from the utilitarian demands from more Teaching 469 and different types of students and from the expansion of sci- entific programs at the graduate level that influenced teachers at the undergraduate level. Whether one looks at catalogs from 1900 or more recently, a common denominator is that new faculty, after a period of apprenticeship at an institution, create new courses that get absorbed into a department’s cur- riculum. For example, F. H. Sanford and Fleishman (1950) found 261 different course titles in their study. Lux and Daniel (1978) found 1,356 different course titles and concluded: “Thus, we have a ‘course title inflation’ of 519%, or about 19% per year on the average, from 1947 to 1975” (p. 178).An expanded breadth of psychology course titles accompanied expansion in American higher education during this time. Nevertheless, a parallel conservative force operates on the curriculum frominside theinstitution as well. Rudolph (1977) reminded us of “the academic truism that changing a curricu- lum is harder than moving the graveyard” (p. 3). As a histo- rian, he knew that such resistance is a complex interaction of internal (departmental faculty and institutional priorities) and external forces (disciplinary groups and community/public constituencies). For psychology, Perlman and McCann (1999a) were led to conclude: Many frequently offered courses have been found for decades and 13 such courses first listed by Henry (1938) are in the pre- sent Top 30. Some courses are slowly being replaced. Thus, the curriculum reflects both continuity and slow change, perhaps due to the time it takes for theory, research, and discourse to de- fine new subdiscipline areas or perhaps due to department inertia and resistance to modifying the curriculum. (p. 181) In the next section, we focus on the concepts of conti- nuity and change in the curriculum, but with an eye to the boundary-setting agendas of disciplinary groups. The Discipline: Recommendations from the Experts Discipline-based curricula are a social construction developed by academics. Over time, knowledge has been organized into key terms, concepts, models, and modes of inquiry. Academics add to and test these knowledge constructs using their disciplinary associations as means of verbal and written communication. Cur- ricular change is conditioned by the role of the disciplines in con- serving and transmitting their organization and representation of what is worth knowing, why, and how. (Ratcliff, 1997, p. 15) In this section, we review various statements made by psy- chologists after World War II about what was “worth know- ing, why, and how” in the study of undergraduate psychology. Such statements carried added weight by virtue of discipli- nary association (APA) or sponsorship in process (national conferences and studies) and outcome (publication in jour- nals such as the American Psychologist). When departmental psychologists engaged in voluntary or required curriculum review projects, they looked to these reports for guidance (Korn, Sweetman, & Nodine, 1996). At the 14th meeting of the American Psychological Asso- ciation, E. C. Sanford (1906) offered a “sketch of a begin- ner’s course in psychology.” He suggested that we first build on the knowledge that students bring with them into this course; second, that we offer a wide base of psychological facts; third, “a genuine interest in science for its own sake is a late development in knowledge of any kind” (p. 59). He then suggested seven broad topics and an organizational se- quence within which to teach them: Learning and Acquisi- tion; Truth and Error; Emotion; Personality and Character; Facts of the Interdependence of Mind and Body; Psychogen- esis; and Systematic Psychology (pp. 59–60). In 1908, the APA appointed the Committee on Methods of Teaching Psy- chology, which decided to inventory goals and teaching prac- tices for the elementary course (Goodwin, 1992). Synthesizing the responses from 32 universities with laboratories, E. C. Sanford (1910) reported that institutions were teaching the first course in sections of 200, 300, and 400 students; Whipple (1910) reported a mean enrollment of 107 students, according to his 100 normal school respon- dents. In institutions with laboratories, Sanford reported that 25% of the instructors saw the course as a gateway to the study of philosophy; more than 50% wanted students to study science for its own sake and also to appreciate the concrete applications of psychology to life. Calkins (1910) summa- rized the responses she received from 47 institutions with no laboratories in this way: First, teach psychology primarily as you would if it were an end in itself. Second, eschew altogether the method of recitation; lecture in order to sum up and to illustrate different topics of study, but lecture sparingly; and cultivate constructive discussion. Third, bar out the possibility of memorizing text-books by requir- ing students to precede text-book study by the solution of con- crete problems. Finally, do not tolerate inexact thinking. (p. 53) Seashore’s (1910) summary included three aims: teach psy- chology (i.e., not philosophy) as a science with incidental treatment of its application; train students in observation and the explanation of mental facts; offer a balanced survey of all topics that psychologists study with an in-depth examination of a few. He urged that the elementary course be taught to sophomores in a two-semester sequence, preferably preceded by a course in animal biology. More than for any other disci- pline of that day, the teacher of psychology should have an ex- ceptionally thorough preparation (because of the breadth of topics), be one of the most mature members of the department 470 Undergraduate Education (because of the direct personal influence that psychology may have on its students), and possess both practical ingenuity and philosophical insight (because of the complex pedagogy required for the course). In short, “the teacher is everything” (p. 91). Wolfle (1942) reviewed more than 100 studies on the first course in psychology, published after the 1910 reports, and concluded: “Now, 30-odd years later, we are still debating many of the same issues and being embarrassed by the same difficulties. Many of the same recommendations considered necessary in 1909 are still necessary in 1942” (p. 686). Intradisciplinary concerns were often matched by interdis- ciplinary conflicts. Wolfe’s (1895) commentary on resource allocation in the sciences for “the new psychology in under- graduate work” (p. 382) predicted this competitive struggle on campuses. Hill (1929) described the conflicts over control of psychology personnel and curricular decisions in state uni- versities. In 1945, James B. Conant, president of Harvard, appointed six psychologists and six nonpsychologists from university faculties, corporations, and research institutes to a University Commission to Advise on the Future of Psychol- ogy at Harvard. Wolfle (1948), as secretary of the APA, reviewed The Place of Psychology in an Ideal University (Gregg et al., 1947/1970) and said: “By all means read this book Psychologists have been a vigorous, sometimes belligerent, but never well united group. . . . This scattering of psychologists all over the campus is bound to be puzzling” (p. 61). In his presidential address for the APA Division on the Teaching of Psychology, Pressey (1949) juxtaposed the prestige accorded psychology in the Gregg et al. report with an observation about Harvard’s Redbook: “Psychology ap- pears to have no recognized place in the program presented in General Education in a Free Society” (p. 149). Thus, on the eve of the post–World War II boom in higher education, psy- chology was still “getting its act together” on institutional status and curricular coherence. Ratcliff’s (1997) analysis of curricula focused on the con- cept of a discipline: A discipline is literally what the term implies. . . . Disciplines can provide a conceptual framework for understanding what knowl- edge is and how it is acquired. Disciplinary learning provides a logical structure to relationships between concepts, propositions, common paradigms, and organizing principles. Disciplines de- velop themes, canons, and grand narratives to join different streams of research in the field and to provide meaningful con- ceptualizations and frameworks for further analysis. (p. 14) Since 1950, psychologists have written several reports about building the discipline and translating its principles and methods into coherent undergraduate educational programs. Lloyd and Brewer (1992) reviewed the national confer- ences and comprehensive reports on undergraduate psychol- ogy: Cornell Conference (Buxton et al., 1952); Michigan Conference (McKeachie & Milholland, 1961); Kulik, 1973; Scheirer and Rogers, 1985; APA/Association of American Colleges Project on Liberal Learning, Study-in-Depth, and the Arts and Sciences Major (McGovern, Furumoto, Halpern, Kimble, & McKeachie, 1991); and the St. Mary’s College of Maryland Conference held in 1991. We will briefly review the Cornell, Michigan, and St. Mary’s College of Maryland conferences’ accomplishments as part of the continuing nar- rative elements for this chapter—courses, discipline, out- comes, assessment, and how service activities delivered these findings to widening circles of psychologists. In 1951, the Carnegie Foundation of New York and the Grant Foundation sponsored a study group of psycholo- gists—six primary authors and 11 consultants—to meet at Cornell University and to conduct “an audit to determine the objectives, examine the content, and appraise the results of the instruction we have been giving. Against the background of such an audit, we can then attempt to build a better cur- riculum” (Buxton et al., 1952, p. v). Their report identified the objectives of undergraduate psychology as: (1) Intellectual development and a liberal education; (2) a knowl- edge of psychology, its research findings, its major problems, its theoretical integrations, and its contributions; (3) personal growth and an increased ability to meet personal and social adjustment problems adequately; (4) desirable attitudes and habits of thought, such as the stimulation of intellectual curios- ity, respect for others, and a feeling of social responsibility. (pp. 2–3) In an interview with Jane Halonen (1992), McKeachie commented about the conference: We came up with the idea of sequencing, which is why Dael Wolfle really brought us together. He thought we were teaching all of our courses at about one level beyond the intro- ductory and covering the same thing in the advanced course in order to bring people up to some common base so they could go on to the latter part of the course. I think that was important. (pp. 251–252) The study group agreed on one recommended curriculum model. The introductory course was to be followed by five in- termediate or core courses (statistics, motivation, perception, thinking and language, and ability), then advanced courses in specialized areas (e.g., social, learning, comparative, phys- iological, personnel, etc.), and finally capstone courses in personality and history and systems. All courses should be Teaching 471 taught as “experimental psychology” courses. The authors wrote separate chapters on personal adjustment courses, technical training, implementation problems based on institu- tional differences, and the need for a research agenda to mea- sure the effectiveness of undergraduate education. A similar study group approach, the Michigan Confer- ence, was sponsored by the National Science Foundation 10 years later and was reported in McKeachie and Milholland (1961). This group began with data from a survey of 548 de- partments to which 411 responded; 274 had revised their cur- riculum since the earlier Cornell report. They found that 69% of the respondents used the earlier recommendations. An im- portant point to note is that the Michigan group of six psy- chologists framed their recommendations in the context of two critical external forces affecting psychology. First, the demographics of higher education were changing both in terms of increased numbers and increased diversity (specifi- cally in age and vocational goals). Second, “more serious than the problem of sheer numbers is the fact that teaching is not a prestigeful occupation in psychology these days. The research man is the status figure” (p. 6). A compelling integration of Veysey’s (1973) three forces—utilitarian demands, scientific advances, and values of a liberal education—form a subtext for this entire report. McKeachie and Milholland (1961) asserted that the psychol- ogy curriculum “would be firmly anchored in the liberal arts, rejecting undergraduate vocational training as a pri- mary goal” (p. 33). This principle is operationalized in great detail in two chapters: “The Beginning Course” and “The Experimental-Statistical Area.” The greatest value lay in “teaching psychology as an organized body of scientific knowledge and method with its own internal structure for de- termining the admissibility of materials to be taught” (p. 59). The authors were unequivocal in their commitment to teaching psychology as a continually advancing science, reaffirming the Cornell group’s objectives: content knowl- edge, rigorous habits of thought, and values and attitudes. They expanded these general goals with a set of 16 objec- tives, many of which are similar to statements about “critical thinking” that emerged as part of identifying liberal arts out- comes when assessment initiatives became so influential in the mid-1980s and after. The Michigan authors sketched three different curricular models because they could not agree on a single one. In what was a utilitarian and prescient comment, they concluded, “What is ideal, we now believe, depends on the staff, the students, the total college curricu- lum, and other factors” (p. 103). Into the 1990s, “staff,” “stu- dents,” and the “total college curriculum” would play an in- creasing role in shaping how individual institutions communicated the discipline. “Other factors”—all external to the discipline and to campuses—would play an even more important role in setting the timetables and parameters for changes in the curriculum. The 1991 St. Mary’s College of Maryland Conference had a long history in development, an ambitious agenda, and di- versity in its participants. Its processes and outcomes reflect the continuing evolution of the discipline’s attention to un- dergraduate education. A resolution introduced to the APA Council of Representatives by the Massachusetts Psycho- logical Association asked the Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) to examine (1) the role and purpose of the undergraduate psychology major in relation to traditional liberal arts education (and prepara- tion for graduate school in psychology) and preparation for a bachelor-degree-level job in a psychology-related field, and (2) whether APA should set forth guidelines for curriculum mod- els in undergraduate psychology (with an accompanying ratio- nale). (As cited in Lloyd & Brewer, 1992, pp. 272–273) The CUE formulated a response, approved by the Council of Representatives in August 1985, that reaffirmed the psychol- ogy baccalaureate as a liberal arts degree, that no prescribed curriculum should be developed, but that guidelines or mod- els could be considered based on continuing, periodic sur- veys of undergraduate education. Continuing discussion led to a conference proposal. Sixty psychologists met for one week in a highly structured group dynamic designed to pro- duce draft chapters of a handbook on seven topics: assess- ment, advising, recruitment and retention of ethnic minority faculty and students, faculty development, faculty networks, curriculum, and active learning practices. Among the 60 par- ticipants at St. Mary’s, 28 (47%) were women and 11 (18%) were ethnic minority persons (neither the 1951 nor the 1960 conference had such representation). In addition to partici- pants from liberal arts colleges and universities, there were five faculty members from community colleges, two from high school psychology programs, and two representatives from Canada and Puerto Rico. As planned, a comprehensive handbook was produced (McGovern, 1993); at the urging of Ludy T. Benjamin, a Quality Principles document was also produced by the steering committee and eventually approved as APA policy by the Council of Representatives (McGovern & Reich, 1996). In their chapter on the curriculum, Brewer et al. (1993) reaffirmed the importance of psychology as a liberal arts dis- cipline. “The fundamental goal of education in psychology, from which all the others follow, is to teach students to think as scientists about behavior” (p. 168). They amplified this statement with six specific goals: attention to human 472 Undergraduate Education diversity, breadth and depth of knowledge, methodological competence, practical experience and applications, commu- nications skills, and sensitivity to ethical issues. To accom- plish these goals, a sequence of four levels of courses was recommended: introductory course, methodology courses, content courses, and an integrative or capstone experience. Content courses should be balanced between the natural sci- ence and social science knowledge bases of an increasingly complex discipline. A special section was devoted to the inte- gration of the community college curriculum with upper- division courses in the major taken at another institution. Perlman and McCann’s (1999b) review of the structures of the undergraduate curriculum in 500 catalogs indicated that the St. Mary’s Conference, like its predecessors, had some intended consequences and specific areas of minimal influence. Although a senior capstone experience has been advocated since the Cornell Conference, this recommenda- tion has gone unheeded, particularly in doctoral institutions. The same is true for the teaching of psychometric methods as part of a core methodology trio of courses with statistics and experimental psychology. Fiscal, staffing, and space prob- lems were often cited as obstacles to the development and maintenance of laboratory facilities. These authors drew the following overall conclusions about the status of the curricu- lum at the end of the twentieth century: The Cornell report’s (Buxton et al., 1952) emphasis on teaching psychology as a scientific discipline in the liberal arts tradition remains current. The required core as recommended by the St. Mary’s report (Brewer et al., 1993) as implemented by de- partments seems to cover “both natural science and social sci- ence aspects of psychology.” (p. 439, pp. 175–176) We now turn to the ways in which psychologists evaluated the effectiveness of their undergraduate programs. SCHOLARSHIP Ratcliff (1997) labeled a second curricular model as analyti- cal. Variables in the curriculum that affect student develop- ment are identified, measured, and evaluated to determine their effectiveness. McGovern (1993) described an analytical model for psychology as: What kind of outcomes can be achieved with What kind of students taught by What kind of faculty using What kind of teaching methods as part of What kind of curriculum? (p. 218, emphases in original) In this section on scholarship, we first focus on faculty efforts to identify common outcomes from the earliest days of a single course to the contemporary “Top 30” described by Perlman and McCann (1999a). Second, we focus on the as- sessment of these outcomes by the faculty, but more often mandated by external constituencies in the interests of ac- creditation or public accountability. Defining the Outcomes of Undergraduate Psychology In response to E. C. Sanford’s (1906) description of an ideal beginner’s course, Walter T. Marvin (1906) suggested the following: The chief problem in any course is: What precisely does the teacher wish the student to learn, as distinguished from all the illustration, exposition, etc. that may be found helpful? In short, every course should include a body of definite and precise information to be thoroughly learned, hard as it may be to secure such information in psychology as compared with the exact sciences Perhaps one of the special habits we can form in the brightest pupils is reading interesting books on psychology. (p. 61) Calkins (1910) was more specific: Psychology is psychology whatever the use to be made of it. First courses in psychology should therefore be essentially the same in content and in method, whether they introduce the student to advanced work in psychology or to the different prob- lems of pedagogy, of ethics or of metaphysics. The [sic] imme- diate purpose of every course in psychology is to make the student expert in the study of himself: to lead him to isolate, an- alyze, to classify, and (in the scientific, not in the metaphysical sense) to explain his own perceiving, remembering, thinking, feeling, and willing. (p. 45, emphasis in original) These two psychologists’ perspectives must be understood in historical context—the field was still in the process of distin- guishing its content and methods from its philosophical an- tecedents. Wolfle (1942), in his review of the literature on the first course since the 1910 studies, identified four prevailing objectives: teach facts and principles, develop scientific method or habits of critical thought, prepare students for later courses or interest in psychology, and eliminate popular su- perstition. However, his evaluation of more than 100 studies suggested to him the following synthesis of major objectives: The first is to acquaint the student with the most important and most generally accepted facts, principles, and hypotheses of psy- chology. The attainment of this objective will contribute to the student’s general cultural education and will increase his ability to recognize and to deal intelligently with the psychological problems of modern society. The second objective to be stressed Scholarship 473 is to develop the habit of critical and objective analysis of psy- chological problems which arise and of the data or hypotheses available to help solve them. The third important objective depends on the attainment of the first two and consists of the im- provement of the student’s ability to understand his own per- sonal problems and to achieve personally and socially desirable solutions of those problems. (pp. 706–707) This ideal synthesis was accomplished after the first 50 years of the new discipline’s history. Recalling Veysey’s (1973) themes, psychology was inthedisciplinary mainstream in pro- viding for the utilitarian needs of society, affirming a respect for science, and espousing the value of liberal arts education. For 25 years after World War II, psychologists continually refined their understanding and pedagogy for these three ob- jectives. As it had done in the first part of the twentieth cen- tury, the knowledge base addressed in Wolfle’s (1942) first objective would continually expand, so much so as to suggest that the discipline had splintered. However, as we discussed in the introduction to the chapter, from the broader historical perspective of American higher education, the period after World War II would bring many different students to the cam- pus with many different objectives. The “psychological prob- lems of modern society” and students’ “personal problems” of Wolfle’s objectives became more complex, and faculty confronted them firsthand in their classrooms. In a paper prepared for the APA Committee on Undergrad- uate Education,Buxton (1956)asked: “Whois responsible for determining the objectives, and the means for reaching them, in liberal education?” (p. 84). He espoused control by each local institution’s faculty but recommended a balance be- tween student-centered (intellectual and personal adjustment) and teacher-centered (content and method) curricular and course objectives. His answer to the question “To what degree should curricular offerings, courses, or requirements be adapted to the student populations served?” (p. 90) focused solely on differences in major fields and career orientations. The student-centered versus teacher-centered curriculum had been debated at length by the Cornell Conference group (Buxton et al., 1952). It would be echoed by the Michigan Conference group (McKeachie & Milholland, 1961), but their response derived from the direct experience of increasingly heterogeneous student populations. In describing three differ- ent types of “first course”—elementary, introductory and “ex- igential, or functionally oriented” (p. 47 ff.)—these authors asserted: The term liberal education has traditionally implied a quest for underlying abstract principles rather than a concern with specific problems. . . . Teaching not bound by practical concerns might produce minds not adjusted to life as it is now lived and poorly suited to meet in a practical way the tasks that every citizen knows how to define. But it could also produce products who could break up these problems and approach them from a point of view off the cultural map commonly believed in. Kulik’s (1973) national survey of undergraduate departments and their highly diverse curricula led him to conclude: It is an empirical question whether curricula like those of liberal arts colleges best meet the ideals of liberal education. Is it con- ceivable that for some students, occupationally oriented pro- grams may provide a better road to personal soundness than the traditional curricula of liberal arts colleges? (p. 202) Developing courses that incorporated the expanding knowledge base and met the needs of changing student populations led to “academic shopping center” curricula (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1977, p. 5). The upside was that our discipline caught the imagination of so many of the new students, especially women, who came to higher education during the 1960s and 1970s. Faculty charged with thinking about undergraduate education from a national (versus local) perspective made every effort to transform the “shopping center” of courses into a coherent discipline. Kulik’s (1973) conclusion was an insightful one and would become an important agenda into the 1990s: “The diverse goals of students in psychology courses suggest that pluralism may be a valuable concept in the design of programs in psychology” (p. 203). As 1 of 12 learned-society task forces in the Association of American Colleges project on the arts and sciences major, McGovern et al. (1991) identified objectives for undergradu- ate psychology. The authors proposed eight common goals for the diversity of settings, students, and courses that char- acterized psychology: 1. Knowledge base. 2. Thinking skills. 3. Language skills. 4. Information gathering and synthesis skills. 5. Research methods and statistical skills. 6. Interpersonal skills. 7. History of psychology. 8. Ethics and values. Assessing the Outcomes of Undergraduate Psychology As we noted in the beginning of this section on scholarship, the desire to identify what students need to learn in their 474 Undergraduate Education psychology courses andthen to evaluate thatlearninghas been manifested throughout the twentieth century. For most of the century, this need derived from psychologists’ scientific cu- riosity and values as wellastheirpenchantfor testing and eval- uating programs. Psychologists evaluated vocabulary terms elementary psychology students needed to know (Jensen, 1933; Thornton & Thornton, 1942)anda more comprehensive “psychological literacy” for the entire major (Boneau, 1990). Almost 50 years before the current assessment mandates, the APA’s Council of Representatives charged a “Committee on the Preparation of Examination Questions in Psychology” (1941): “(1) to explore the need and desire for comprehensive examinations in psychology, and (2) to find out the extent to which questions or items now exist that may be drawn upon in constructing comprehensive examinations” (p. 838). Seventy percent of the411respondents to asurveyfrom this committee favored such an effort, and almost 50% reported that they would use such examinations in their programs. Since the mid-1980s, the external forces of regional ac- crediting associations and state legislatures have demanded that all departments and campuses participate in regular self- studies, a major component of which is the assessment of student learning outcomes. Halpern et al. (1993) offered a comprehensive outcomes assessment program for psychol- ogy. They described the external forces calling for such ef- forts and suggested that psychologists possess unique skills for evaluating educational outcomes. They argued that the desired outcomes for undergraduate psychology included a knowledge base (e.g., content areas, methods, theory, and history); intellectual skills (e.g., thinking, communication, information gathering and synthesis skills, and quantitative, scientific and technological skills); and personal characteris- tics (e.g., interpersonal and intrapersonal skills, motiva- tion, ethics, and sensitivity to people and cultures). The authors advocated a multimethod matrix approach, including archival forms of assessment data, classroom assessment, standardized testing, course-embedded assessment, portfolio analysis, interviews, external examiners, performance-based assessment strategies, and assessment of critical thinking. Since the St. Mary’s Conference, articles regularly ap- peared demonstrating how departments used this Halpern et al. (1993) blueprint for assessment activities. The Quality Principles (McGovern & Reich, 1996), endorsed as APA pol- icy, included this statement: Faculty establish mechanisms to assess the curriculum. Essential elements of an assessment program include a. clearly stated and achievable outcomes for the curriculum and other program-related experiences. b. multiple measures of students’ learning. c. planned opportunities for systematic feedback to students on their progress. d. specific plans to use data assessment to improve individual course instruction and the overall curriculum. e. opportunities to communicate assessment results to multiple constituencies of undergraduate psychology. (p. 255) In the next section, we focus on service—how psycholo- gists, through their communications and activities with one another at national and regional meetings—achieved greater sophistication and effectiveness in their pedagogy and a dis- tinctive disciplinary character for our undergraduate acade- mic programs. SERVICE A consistent problem was evident for most of the twentieth century: What has been the result, after 30 years, of the 1951 recommen- dation that we give primary emphasis, in the undergraduate cur- riculum, to the contribution psychology can make to a liberal education, to Renaissance persons? Few contemporary psychol- ogists, beyond those actively involved in the conferences or in national committees explicitly charged with undergraduate edu- cation, have an awareness that the conferences were even held, let alone awareness of the recommendations made.Amajor chal- lenge for undergraduate education in the next decade is to involve a greater proportion of leading psychologists in discussion of the issues in developing and maintaining effective undergraduate education in a rapidly changing environment. (Fretz, 1982, p. 55) Fretz’s observation in a special issue on curriculum of the journal Teaching of Psychology should not be limited just to one historical period; recall similar comments made by E. C. Sanford (1910) and Wolfle (1942). However, in the last decades of the twentieth century, there has been ample evi- dence that a “greater proportion of leading psychologists” have become involved in networks of service activities in be- half of undergraduate education. In Teaching Psychology in America: A History (Puente, Matthews, & Brewer, 1992), numerous authors documented how organized groups advanced the teaching and scholarship of the discipline via service activities at the regional, state, and national levels. We urge the reader to review other his- torical analyses to appreciate more fully how the teaching of psychology was portrayed in psychological journals (Beins, 1992), in undergraduate textbooks (Morawski, 1992; Weiten & Wight, 1992) and handbooks (Pate, 1992), or in experi- mental laboratories (Benjamin, 2000; Capshew, 1992). Past as Prologue for the Twenty-First Century 475 Goodwin (1992) suggested that “the APA’s involvement with teaching was sporadic at best in the years prior to 1945 [T]he APA had other priorities during that time (p.330) establishing disciplinary identity for psychology and professional status for psychologists (p. 339).” In con- trast, Nelson and Stricker (1992) made a persuasive case that “the APA has demonstrated a clear commitment to issues of teaching and the needs of teachers since 1945” (p. 346). An Education and Training (E&T) Board became part of a reor- ganized APA in 1951 so that “organized psychology not lose sight of its responsibilities in addressing more fundamental issues of education (i.e., in psychology as part of liberal edu- cation)” (p. 348). The E&T Board was instrumental in spon- soring the various conferences on undergraduate education reviewed by Lloyd and Brewer (1992). Brewer (1997) and Ernst and Petrossian (1996) also de- scribed how the APA established in 1996 a continuing com- mittee for Teachers of Psychology in Secondary Schools (TOPSS). This action recognized that “an estimated 800,000 students take precollege psychology courses each year” and that “approximately 15,000 students took the [AP] exam, making psychology the fastest growing Advanced Placement exam in the history of the ETS’s program” (Brewer, 1997, p. 440). Wight and Davis (1992) described the various stages that Division 2, Teaching of Psychology (now the Society for the Teaching of Psychology), went through in serving APA mem- bers committed to learning not just about scientific method- ologies and results from one another but about the pedagogy by which the discipline might be more effectively communi- cated to its students. Daniel (1992) described the evolution of the division’s journal, Teaching of Psychology, which serves similar needs and functions in the description, evaluation, and dissemination of innovative pedagogical and program- matic practice. Focusing on regional service activities, Davis and Smith (1992) described a plethora of conferences for teachers and students of psychology. Focusing on how psy- chologists have gathered students to learn more about the dis- cipline at the college and community college campus levels, Cousins, Tracy, and Giordano (1992) described the histories of Psi Chi and Psi Beta, the two national honor societies. As the twentieth century came to a close, the APA Division 2, Society for the Teaching of Psychology (STP), posted a Web site (www.teachpsych.org) available to students and fac- ulty members for information about the division, its journal, national and regional teaching conferences, teaching awards, a mentoring service, a departmental consulting service, news- letters, and a moderated discussion group for psychology teachers at all levels of instruction. The STP Office of Teach- ing Resources in Psychology (OTRP Online) provides information on course syllabi, bibliographical material on di- versity and cross-cultural issues, ethical issues in teaching, student advising issues and practices, scientific writing, and electronic databases for the journal Teaching of Psychology. As another manifestation of APA’s long-range commit- ment to academic psychology programs articulated with the initiation of the new Education Directorate in the early 1990s, 99 participants from high school, community college, college and research university, and other professional set- tings met at James Madison University in 1999 for the Psychology Partnerships Project (P3). It was the most di- verse assembly of psychology teachers to date, building on the group dynamic approach used at the St. Mary’s Confer- ence of Maryland a decade earlier. Nine issues groups— advising, curriculum, faculty development, research, tech- nology, assessment, diversity, partnerships, and service learning—developed projects to create networks, materials, and strategies for promoting the teaching of psychology and the lifelong learning needs of students and faculty in the di- verse, changing world of the twenty-first century. As Weiten et al. (1993) noted, “teaching and learning are communal activities” (p. 157). They described a portfolio of case studies that demonstrated the movement of psycholo- gists from isolation to increasing communication and colle- giality. With the advent of the twenty-first century, the service activities of psychologists have fostered increased colle- giality in behalf of the teaching of psychology. Electronic communication networks enable this collegiality to have un- precedented depth and breadth. PAST AS PROLOGUE FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY Psychology is not only with us, but swamping us. Its popularity is so great as to arouse suspicions of superficiality, or even quackery. It has become almost a fashion, so that publishers claim that the word psychology on the title page of a book is suf- ficient guarantee for a substantial sale. (p. 596) Was this an editorial from a newspaper or a speech by a leg- islator in the year 2000? A commentary from a church pulpit in the 1950s? The quote is from an article by a faculty mem- ber at the Carnegie Institute of Technology, Max Schoen (1926), writing about the purposes of elementary courses in psychology in his era. In response to such popularity, the au- thor suggested that the aims of psychology in colleges were to “create an intelligent reading audience” and “to inculcate in the student a tolerant, open-minded and broad attitude to- wards human affairs and human problems” (p. 596). 476 Undergraduate Education We suggest the following two dynamics for undergraduate education in the future. First, Veysey’s (1973) three catalytic forces, the external demands on higher education, can be considered constant after more than 200 years of influence—utilitarian needs of American society, scientific discovery and an increasing re- spect for empirical evidence in the construction and applica- tions of knowledge, and the virtues of liberal education in creating a responsible citizenry. Every generation must grap- ple with how best to respond to these demands via curricula and academic practices (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Second, it is the responsibility of the disciplines and the professions, the internal forces of higher education, to create and then to communicate increasingly complex theories and sophisticated applications, thereby enabling students to be lifelong problem solvers, amiable skeptics, and citizens. The discipline of psychology is well positioned as a socio- cultural force in the broader society to address America’s util- itarian needs, scientific knowledge, and liberal education values. However, we need continuing scholarship, teaching, and service for the discipline to be more analytical in its aca- demic program efforts.Thus, wereturn toMcGovern’s (1993) questions as a future teaching, research, and service agenda: What kind of outcomes can be achieved with What kind of students taught by What kind of faculty using What kind of teaching methods as part of What kind of curriculum? (p. 218, emphases in original). These questions need to be understood within the contexts of external forces acting on the academy as well as internal responses of the faculty and their institutions. The outcomes expected of a baccalaureate education are increasingly utilitarian. For example, consumers and sup- porters of higher education consider the postgraduation employment opportunities for specific majors to be very important. This fact is especially critical for psychology to understand, because we now award almost 75,000 baccalau- reates annually, and the major’s popularity has not waned. Research on alumni satisfaction is an essential element of program evaluation (Borden & Rajecki, 2000; McGovern & Carr, 1989). Moreover, departments’ program development activities regularly include community employers and exter- nal consultants (Korn et al., 1996; Walker, Newcomb, & Hopkins, 1987). The kinds of students taking undergraduate psychology have changed, most notably in their gender and ethnic charac- teristics (McGovern & Hawks, 1986, 1988). In a report titled “The Changing Face ofAmerican Psychology,” Howard et al. (1986) reported the growing percentages of women who re- ceived baccalaureates in the discipline: 36.8% (1950), 41% (1960), 46.4% (1972), 66.8% (1982). McGovern and Reich (1996) reported 73% for 1992–1993. The percentages of doc- torates achieved by women had similar percentage increases: 14.8% (1950), 17.5% (1960), 26.7% (1972), 50.1% (1984), and 61% (1992–1993). Ten years after the Howard et al. re- port, Pion et al. (1996) reported on the consequences of this shifting gender composition, and they concluded: Psychology, along with the majority of professions and scientific disciplines, has undergone dramatic shifts in gender composition over the past two decades. These changes have prompted con- cern that this increased participation by women may lead to erosion in the status of these occupations Societal and disci- plinary trends are examined, along with data on the patterns of men’s and women’s involvement in the educational pipeline and workplace. The results provide little support for the concern over the increasing representation of women and its impact on the prestige of the discipline. (p. 509) Denmark (1994) asserted, “Engendering psychology refers to cultivating a psychology that is sensitive to issues of gender and diversity. The increase in the number of female psychologists does not guarantee that the discipline will be responsive to those issues” (p. 329). In our historical review of teaching, scholarship, and service activities, we discov- ered significant changes in the rhetoric about women and the discipline, but programmatic change continues to be difficult. As McGovern et al. (1991) noted in their APA/AAC project report: Comments on an earlier draft of this article also pointed to dif- ferent views on how best to integrate gender, ethnicity, culture, and class into the study of psychology Most psychologists would acknowledge that faculty members must challenge cam- pus racism and sexism, but there is less agreement on how to do so. Gender, ethnicity, culture, and class are seen by some teach- ers as issues that challenge the contemporary curricula. Such a challenge also questions traditional research methodologies that are empirical, quantitative, and positivist, and may advocate al- ternative psychological methods that are contextual, interpretive, and more qualitative. Other psychologists believe that, although these topics and the new knowledge generated by research have legitimacy in the discipline, they should be subtopics best left to treatments determined by an instructor’s sensitivities and com- mitments. (pp. 599–600) The above quotation captures the difficult conversations that must be taking place in classrooms and in departmental Past as Prologue for the Twenty-First Century 477 meetings about the very nature of the discipline, not just stu- dents’ demographic characteristics. In their article “The Diversification of Psychology: A Multicultural Revolution,” Sue, Bingham, Porche-Burke, and Vasquez (1999) identified four major approaches to teaching about multiculturalism and diversity: “the separate course model, the area of con- centration model, the interdisciplinary model, and the integration model” (p. 1066), ultimately advocating the inte- gration model as the one best suited for the depth and breadth of learning they hope students will achieve. Puente et al. (1993) used the metaphor of teaching a “psychology of vari- ance” as the means to change the epistemology of students, departments, the curriculum, and the discipline. Enns (1994) advocated a similar approach to challenge the cultural rela- tivism of psychological constructs. What is consistent across reports from academia and from the external community is that attention to diversity issues is no longer a matter of indi- vidual faculty sensitivity but a utilitarian requirement for em- ployment advancement in a changing workplace. The script for how institutions and departments will address this expec- tation will be written in the global twenty-first century. For the first half of the twentieth century, psychology fac- ulties were required to be excellent teachers. “The teacher is everything” (Seashore, 1910, p. 91). Then, as we documented in the first section of this chapter, research became more im- portant in academic life after World War II. “Teaching is not a prestigeful occupation in psychol- ogy these days. The research man is the status figure” (McKeachie & Milholland, 1961, p. 6). Ideally, these two ac- tivities could be synergistic and rewarded accordingly, whether the faculty member was affiliated with a liberal arts college or a research university. However, as the century ended, external forces demanded that the values and time apportioned to teaching, research, and service activities be reconsidered. Halpern et al. (1998) concluded that a new definition of scholarship was required, one that would main- tain traditional benchmarks for excellence (e.g., high level of discipline-specific expertise and peer review), but one that would integrate teaching and scholarly activities more. Drawing on Boyer’s (1990) treatise, the authors proposed a five-part, expansive definition for future scholarship in psy- chology: original research, integration of knowledge, applica- tion of knowledge, scholarship of pedagogy, and scholarship of teaching inpsychology.In a collectionof essays in response to the report from this STP Task Force on Defining Scholar- ship in Psychology, Girgus (1999) and Korn (1999) advised that institutional mission should be seen as an absolutely essential context for definitions and standards. Korn echoed the historical trends that we discovered in our analyses in his critical response to the “new definitions”: “I contend, however, that the activities of teaching can and should be dis- tinguished from research, in order to give teaching the respect it deserves”(p. 362). Likethe complex responses necessary to meet the needs of changing students, changing demands on faculty commitments will be debated into this century as well. Teaching methods throughout the century included the lec- ture, seminar or small-group discussion section, laboratory, fieldwork and practica, and independent or supervised re- search projects. Technological advances modestly influenced each of these methods—better microphones, better audio- visual systems, better textbooks and auxiliary materials, and better observation and data-collection equipment. Then, in the last 20 years of the twentieth century, information tech- nology revolutionized how we conceptualize, deliver, and evaluate teaching and learning inAmerican higher education. Although we characterized the 1904 Wisconsin Idea of ex- tended education as an early example of “distance learning,” the dairy farmers of the Midwest who gathered with faculty members from their state’s land-grant universities’ colleges of agriculture probably did not envision twenty-first-century models of “asynchronous learning” accomplished on laptop computers in their living rooms. Despite such advances, how- ever, we are confident in returning to a timeless formula: All teaching is mediated learning. Regardless of the nature of what is to be learned and how, a teacher first must listen to a student, and then together they must construct the most effec- tive mediation so that the student learns how to learn and to become self-motivated and self-evaluating in that effort. Calkins (1910) had it right: “Teach psychology primarily as you would if it were an end in itself” (p. 53). In the latter part of the nineteenth century, the new science of psychology emerged from its philosophical roots and began to develop a disciplinary identity. Curriculum devel- opment was the means by which this identity was repeatedly communicated and modified. As we have tried to demon- strate in our historical review of American higher education in general, and of psychology in particular, a driving force in- side and outside the academy was how best to define the lib- eral arts. Although the trivium and the quadrivium no longer define the essence of a university education, in what ways do the goals of that medieval curriculum differ from those proposed for a liberal arts psychology curriculum by Brewer et al. (1993), Halpern et al. (1993), or McGovern et al. (1991)? There were two special issues of the journal Teach- ing of Psychology in the 1990s; one was devoted to the teach- ing of writing across the curriculum (Nodine, 1990) and the other to teaching critical thinking across the curriculum (Halpern & Nummedal, 1995). We believe that higher educa- tion’s and psychology’s responses to defining the liberal arts not only will shape the curriculum but should guide all of our [...]... Sugarman, 199 9; Messer, Sass, & Woolfolk, 198 8; Polkinghorne, 199 0; Richardson, Fowers, & Guignon, 199 9; Robinson, 199 1; Rychlak, 199 4].) In my efforts to find a corrective to the traditional psychological view of the African American (Jenkins, 199 5), I have drawn on the extensive theoretical and empirical work of Joseph Rychlak and his students ( 196 8, 199 4) His framework, which he originally called a psychology. .. Teaching of Psychology, 26, 177–182 Perlman, B., & McCann, L I ( 199 9b) The structure of the undergraduate psychology curriculum Teaching of Psychology, 26, 171–176 Rice, C E (2000) Uncertain genesis: The academic institutionalization of American psychology in 190 0 American Psychologist, 55, 488– 491 Ruckmich, C A ( 191 2) The history and status of psychology in the United States American Journal of Psychology, ... Priorities of the professoriate Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Denmark, F L ( 199 4) Engendering psychology American Psychologist, 49, 3 29 334 Brewer, C L ( 199 7) Undergraduate education in psychology: Will the mermaids sing? American Psychologist, 52, 434–441 Enns, C Z ( 199 4) On teaching about the cultural relativism of psychological constructs Teaching of Psychology, 21, 205–211 Boneau, C A ( 199 0)... (1 890 ) Psychology at the University of Wisconsin American Journal of Psychology, 3, 275–276 Jensen, M B ( 193 3) Relative values of the vocabulary terms of general psychology Psychological Review, 40, 196 –208 McGovern, T V., & Hawks, B K ( 198 6) The varieties of undergraduate experience Teaching of Psychology, 13, 174–181 McGovern, T V., & Hawks, B K ( 198 8) The liberating science and art of undergraduate psychology. .. University Press Committee on the Preparation of Examination Questions in Psychology ( 194 1) Proceedings of the forty-ninth annual meeting of the American Psychological Association Psychological Bulletin, 38, 838–841 Almanac (2000, September 1) Earned degrees conferred, 199 6– 199 7 Chronicle of Higher Education, p 32 Cooney, B R., & Griffith, D M ( 199 4) The 199 2– 199 3 undergraduate survey Washington, DC: American... high psychology instruction American Psychologist, 51, 256–258 Fretz, B J ( 198 2) Aftermath of the renaissance in undergraduate psychology: Enlightenment or Machiavellian? Teaching of Psychology, 9, 55– 59 Furumoto, L ( 198 9) The new history of psychology In I S Cohen (Ed.), G Stanley Hall Lecture Series (Vol 9, pp 5–34) Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Garvey, C R ( 192 9) List of American... McGovern, T V., & Carr, K F ( 198 9) Carving out the niche: A review of alumni surveys on undergraduate psychology majors Teaching of Psychology, 16, 52–57 Hilgard, E R., Leary, D E., & McGuire, G R ( 199 1) The history of psychology: A survey and critical assessment Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 79 107 McGovern, T V., Furumoto, L., Halpern, D F., Kimble, G A., & McKeachie, W J ( 199 1) Liberal education, study... American Psychologist, 51, 5 09 528 Schmitz, B ( 199 2) Core curriculum and cultural pluralism: A guide for campus planners Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges Pressey, S L ( 194 9) The place and functions of psychology in undergraduate programs American Psychologist, 4, 148–150 Schoen, M ( 192 6) Elementary course in psychology American Journal of Psychology, 37, 593 – 599 Project on Liberal Learning,... Association Wolfe, H K (1 895 ) The new psychology in undergraduate work Psychological Review, 2, 382–387 Wolfle, D ( 194 2) The first course in psychology Psychological Bulletin, 39, 685–712 Whitehead, A N ( 195 2) The aims of education New York: Mentor (Original work published 192 9) Wolfle, D ( 194 8) The place of psychology in an ideal university [Review of the book The place of psychology in an ideal university]... (Guthrie, 199 8) Some in the new generation of African American scholars chose to reject Western perspectives altogether and move in new conceptual directions The development of the Afrocentric perspective in psychology is a prime example, and a considerable body of literature has come from this point of view (for example, Akbar, 199 1; L J Myers, 198 8; Nobles, 199 1; J L White & Parham, 199 0) For others of us, . Reich ( 199 6) reported 73% for 199 2– 199 3. The percentages of doc- torates achieved by women had similar percentage increases: 14.8% ( 195 0), 17.5% ( 196 0), 26.7% ( 197 2), 50.1% ( 198 4), and 61% ( 199 2– 199 3) 198 5; Howard & Conway, 198 6; Martin & Sugarman, 199 9; Messer, Sass, & Woolfolk, 198 8; Polking- horne, 199 0; Richardson, Fowers, & Guignon, 199 9; Robin- son, 199 1; Rychlak, 199 4].) In. table of the 30 most frequent under- graduate courses offered in 194 7, 196 1, 196 9, and 197 5. Perlman and McCann ( 199 9a, p. 1 79) continued this tradition by identifying the 30 most frequently offered