Teaching in the field of psychology poses special challenges. This occurs for a variety of reasons. First,
psychology is a relatively fragmented field. It is composed of multiple subdisciplines that are often relatively
cut off from one another. Second, although psychology has defined itself as a science, unlike the natural
sciences, it is difficult to identify any single set of foundational concepts that are shared by all
psychologists. Third, different psychologists are committed to different theoretical and philosophical
perspectives that provide alternative ways of framing theory and method. In the absence of a unifying
framework, how does one go about the process of teaching psychology?
In addition to challenges raised by the structure of the field, one might raise a variety of questions about
the process of teaching psychology. Are we teachers whose purpose is to disseminate knowledge? Or are
we professors whose purpose is to teach the "truth" as we know it? When asked to explain human
behavior, many advanced students seem content resort to common sense, failing to incorporate
psychological concepts in their explanations. Why is this the case? The teaching of psychology continues
to be dominated by encyclopedic textbooks that encourage breadth of memorization rather than genuine
understanding of psychological concepts and issues. This situation is exacerbated by the tendency to use
multiple choice testing and related devices as primary modes of assessment. Is it possible that our habitual
modes of teaching and assessment fail to stimulate the types of reading, writing, thinking and inquiry skills
that we value as scholars?
These questions prompt a return to first principles. What does it mean to teach psychology? What values
undergird our pedagogical practices? What sorts of developmental pathways are we attempting to foster?
What models of teaching and learning can we propose that provide integrative answers to these
questions. How can we put such models into praxis?
psychology is a relatively fragmented field. It is composed of multiple subdisciplines that are often relatively
cut off from one another. Second, although psychology has defined itself as a science, unlike the natural
sciences, it is difficult to identify any single set of foundational concepts that are shared by all
psychologists. Third, different psychologists are committed to different theoretical and philosophical
perspectives that provide alternative ways of framing theory and method. In the absence of a unifying
framework, how does one go about the process of teaching psychology?
In addition to challenges raised by the structure of the field, one might raise a variety of questions about
the process of teaching psychology. Are we teachers whose purpose is to disseminate knowledge? Or are
we professors whose purpose is to teach the "truth" as we know it? When asked to explain human
behavior, many advanced students seem content resort to common sense, failing to incorporate
psychological concepts in their explanations. Why is this the case? The teaching of psychology continues
to be dominated by encyclopedic textbooks that encourage breadth of memorization rather than genuine
understanding of psychological concepts and issues. This situation is exacerbated by the tendency to use
multiple choice testing and related devices as primary modes of assessment. Is it possible that our habitual
modes of teaching and assessment fail to stimulate the types of reading, writing, thinking and inquiry skills
that we value as scholars?
These questions prompt a return to first principles. What does it mean to teach psychology? What values
undergird our pedagogical practices? What sorts of developmental pathways are we attempting to foster?
What models of teaching and learning can we propose that provide integrative answers to these
questions. How can we put such models into praxis?
| CALL FOR PAPERS Pedagogy and the Human Sciences invites submissions for its special inaugural issue: What does it mean to teach and learn psychology? |
Please submit papers addressing any issue related to the themes discussed above. Papers should be no
more than 8000 words (not including references and figures) and prepared in APA format. All papers should
be submitted as Microsoft Word attachment and emailed to Michael.Mascolo@Merrimack.edu. Please
indicate PPS in the subject line. Papers that pursue conceptual, theoretical or empirical themes are welcome.
The deadline for submission is March 1, 2008. Although not obligatory, individuals interested in contributing
are encouraged to send a letter describing their intended submission to the journal editor for commentary.
more than 8000 words (not including references and figures) and prepared in APA format. All papers should
be submitted as Microsoft Word attachment and emailed to Michael.Mascolo@Merrimack.edu. Please
indicate PPS in the subject line. Papers that pursue conceptual, theoretical or empirical themes are welcome.
The deadline for submission is March 1, 2008. Although not obligatory, individuals interested in contributing
are encouraged to send a letter describing their intended submission to the journal editor for commentary.
 | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| © 2007, Pedagogy and the Human Sciences, All Rights Reserved |
Pedagogy
and the Human Sciences
| practice |
| reflection |
| theory |