Stiles, W. B.; Schilling,
K. M.; Rorer, L. G.; Knudson, R. M.; Paternite,
C. E.; Leitner, L. M.; Wright, M. O.; & Biran,
M. W. (1992). Pluralistic professional education:
A modular curriculum in clinical psychology. Teaching
of Psychology. 19(4), 211-216.
Abstract
We describe a pluralistic curriculum for doctoral
education in clinical psychology. Two successful
curricular innovations are highlighted. First,
the usual courses in psychopathology, psychological
assessment, and intervention are offered as
5-week modules. Each module covers a subtopic
within the broader area (e.g., Introduction
to the MMPI as an assessment module; Depression
as a psychopathology module). Second, students
are introduced to alternative psychotherapeutic
approaches in practicum courses that integrate
didactic material with supervised practice
in a particular approach. Students select the
modules and practica that meet their career
goals. All students acquire a core, but not
necessarily the same core.
Pluralistic
Professional Education:
A Modular Curriculum in Clinical
Psychology
Since 1976, the graduate program in clinical
psychology at Miami University has practiced
a pluralistic philosophy that recognizes a
diversity of approaches to the central topics
of clinical psychology. The program is designed
to present major approaches in the field as
coherent, plausible alternatives. The program
is intended to ensure that graduate students
attain competence in a range of approaches
so that they can function professionally in
their chosen career paths, while fostering
their critical facility and allowing them the
latitude to make their own fully informed selections.
This article describes some distinctive features
of our program.
Pluralistic
Trends in Clinical Psychology
Any original consensus about the
specific content of clinical psychology's core
disappeared
long ago. During the 1940s and 1950s the
field's early focus on hospital-based, psychodynamically-oriented
diagnostic assessment was challenged by a
broadened
definition of professional training (Derner,
1965; Raimy, 1950; Shakow, 1945), by behavioral
and humanistic approaches, and by the debate
over clinical versus statistical prediction
(Meehl, 1954). These and successive controversies,
along with the independent development of
hundreds of alternative psychotherapeutic approaches
(e.g., Herink, 1980; Karasu, 1986), proliferation
of assessment techniques (Goldstein & Hersen,
1990; Matarazzo, 1990; Sattler, 1990), and
efforts toward integration among alternative
clinical psychologies (e.g., Norcross, 1986)
and with sociology and biology (e.g., biopsychosocial
and psychoneuroimmunologic approaches; Engel,
1980; Schwartz, 1982) have left the field littered
with conflicting positions. Although some of
these approaches may be dismissed as frivolous,
many of them offer distinctive and internally
coherent epistemologies and views of personhood,
as well as assessment and intervention techniques,
and they cannot be so easily disregarded on
conceptual grounds. Empirically, the Dodo verdict,
used repeatedly to describe the state of comparative
psychotherapy outcome research, "Everybody
has won and all must have prizes" (Carroll,
1865/1946, p. 28; Frank, 1973, p. 1; Grencavage & Norcross,
1990, p. 372; Luborsky, Singer, & Luborsky,
1975, p. 995; Rosenzweig, 1936, p. 412; Stiles,
Shapiro, & Elliott, 1986, p. 165), strikes
a note that resonates throughout the field.
Students and professionals are confronted with
choices at many levels: schools of therapy
(e.g., psychoanalytic, rational-emotive, interpersonal,
personal construct), techniques of assessment
(e.g., personality inventories, projective
tests, behavioral assessment), levels of intervention
(individual, family, school, group), populations
(adult, child; inpatient, outpatient), problems
(schizophrenia, depression, attention deficit).
These choices are not independent; for example,
adopting a psychoanalytic perspective is likely
to entail an interest in projective assessment
techniques and individual outpatient treatment.
Some may choose integrative or eclectic approaches
-- holding that seemingly diverse clinical
psychologies can be combined or used selectively
-- but these approaches can, in turn, be criticized
for not acknowledging incompatibilities of
some basic assumptions of the varied approaches
(e.g., Messer, 1986).
Faced with this diversity, some clinical psychology
graduate programs have adopted a nearly exclusive
emphasis on one approach (e.g., behavioral
and cognitive, psychoanalytic). Some others
have gradually accumulated an unsystematic
amalgam of approaches, illustrated by clinical
programs whose faculty have moved far from
their psychodynamic roots but still teach projective
testing to all students. National conferences on graduate education
in psychology have debated whether students,
clinical psychology, or the field of psychology
as a whole are better served by a model emphasizing
a common core or one acknowledging the disparities
(e.g., Bickman & Ellis, 1990). Typically,
however, such discussions have addressed
these issues at a level more abstract than
the practical
implications for implementing a curriculum.
Whether clinical psychology's diversity represents
a stage in development toward a broader consensus
or a reflection of diversity in the human
condition is itself a matter of controversy.
There are
positive elements in the diversity of approaches,
and some people argue that the current pluralistic,
dynamic nature of clinical psychology is
central to the field's character, not a temporary
aberration.
back
to top
Environment
and History of the Program
Miami University, established as
a state-assisted university in 1809, has about
16,000
students
and is located in Oxford, a town of about
10,000 people (excluding Miami students) in southwestern
Ohio. Miami's psychology department offers
PhD specializations in social and experimental
(with emphases in developmental, physiological,
cognitive, and perception) as well as in
clinical
psychology. Students are admitted to the
PhD program only, but MA degree requirements
are
normally met as part of the program. In recent
years, the department, which has about 25
full-time faculty, has admitted about 14 new
graduate
students each year, about half of them to
the clinical program. A small Psychology Clinic,
operated in conjunction with the clinical
graduate
program, accepts clients from both the university
and the surrounding community at nominal
fees. Miami University's graduate program in
clinical psychology
was inaugurated in 1968 and has
been accredited by the American Psychological
Association (APA) since 1972. During 1975
and 1976, five clinical faculty left the program
for various reasons, and by the end of the
1975-76 academic year, no one who had been
involved in organizing the program remained. Because
new faculty found it difficult to reconstruct
the organization and rationale
of the original program, we decided to begin
anew. Between 1976 and 1981, we developed
an entirely new curriculum. This curriculum
has
been stable in its essentials for more than
10 years, and we have confidence in its feasibility.
back
to top
Rationale
and Goals
The Miami clinical program's philosophy holds
that although professionals must have competence
in each of the broad areas of assessment, psychopathology,
intervention, and research, there is no particular
technique or approach that everyone must have.
The program recognizes no sacred canon within
clinical psychology, no single core that all
students must know. It considers that few students
are ready to commit themselves to one theoretical
position (even eclecticism) at the beginning
of their graduate work (cf. Vyse, 1990), and
confronts them with multiple psychologies rather
than one psychology. There is a programmatic
skepticism about orthodoxy in clinical psychology.
Our model holds that a critical appraisal
of competing approaches requires a clear articulation
of the alternatives, of the complexity of theoretical
stances, and of the differential implications
for action (e.g., assessment and intervention
techniques). Skill development is placed in
a context of clinical problem solving within
divergent theoretical traditions. The model
views the appropriate goal of doctoral education
as learning how to learn, rather than providing
definitive strategies.
As one way of implementing this philosophy,
new faculty have been recruited for offering
an approach that complements, but is different
from, those already offered. Thus, the program
embodies the pluralism that characterizes the
field generally. The resulting diversity of
theoretical orientations among the faculty
means that we keep one another from falling
into easy cliches, a danger in narrowly specialized
groups in which everyone espouses the same
approach. However, our collective pluralistic
philosophy is not necessarily shared by individual
faculty members, who may practice and teach
relatively pure versions of their preferred
approach.
One
goal of the program is to foster respect for
diversity as reasoned
and real. Far from
advocating an "everything goes" position, our
pluralism is structured to show that all positions,
including those taught within the program,
are subject to question and may be rejected
by competent, reasonable professionals. Students
are exposed to the differing points of view,
and, we believe, stimulated to think through
the issues more critically than they would
if given a single, "correct" formulation. On
the other hand, this criticism is not nihilistic
because it derives from a constructive alternative
position; that is, each critic is also an advocate
for some alternative. Facing the differences on a day-to-day basis
encourages synthesis, balance, and reconciliation.
Thus, the program facilitates mutual understanding
and integration, and it does not rule out eclecticism,
which is also a viable position represented
in the program. On the other hand, eclecticism
is subject to criticism by those who see deep
incompatibilities among the alternatives. Not
all students or faculty members aim for synthesis,
and some find value in ongoing mutually respectful
debate.
The
program recognizes that graduate students have
different prior
preparation, interests,
and career goals and may find different approaches
and techniques congenial. It seeks a balance
between exposing students to a range of ideas
and allowing them to pursue their specialized
interests. The program does not offer "tracks" but
encourages each student to develop his or her
own track in consultation with an adviser. Ultimately, students must choose among or
integrate the diverse approaches. Faculty are
committed to informing and facilitating, but
not predetermining, students' construction
of their own position. We systematically provide
opportunities for students to sort out their
impressions, but we do not promote an official
synthesis.
back
to top
Program
Components
In this article, we highlight
two curricular innovations: (a) a system
of modules for teaching
the principal content areas of psychopathology,
psychological assessment, and psychological
intervention, and (b) didactic/practical
practicum courses for introducing psychotherapeutic
approaches.
These two components comprise the bulk of
professional course work in the program.
Each module or practicum is designed to
present
an internally consistent system of thought
or practice. Recognizing that the systems
often conflict with each other, the program
also
provides opportunities for alternative systems
to be presented and discussed in the same
forum. These include (a) a first-year "fundamentals" course
in clinical psychology, (b) a weekly Clinic
case conference, (c) a required course associated
with students' work in half-time clinical
traineeship placements, and (d) a doctoral
comprehensive
examination that is individually tailored
by the student in consultation with his
or her
adviser. Our curricular adaptations to pluralism
take place in a context of other, more traditional
components of PhD programs. The latter include
departmental requirements for courses in
research methods and statistics, and for
a distribution
of seminars on topics in social and experimental
as well as clinical psychology. The seminar
requirements help meet the APA accreditation
criteria (American Psychological Association,
1986) for competence within the content areas
of biological, cognitive-affective, social,
and individual bases of behavior. All graduate
students are required to be involved continuously
in research and to complete a master's thesis
and a doctoral dissertation. Although research
is a central part of the program, we do not
emphasize it in this article because it is
organized along familiar lines.
Modules
Modules in our program are one-credit
courses that meet for 5 weeks within a 15-week
semester.
The traditional content areas of psychopathology,
theory and methods of psychological assessment,
and psychological intervention are taught
as modules. Students are required to take
at least a minimum number of credits within
each area (currently 3 in psychopathology,
2 in theory of assessment, 6 in assessment
techniques, 3 in intervention), but within
each area they may select those modules that
are consistent with their individual career
goals. The specific topics of module offerings
vary from year to year, but several from
each content area are offered every year.
Instructors may specify prerequisites or
offer sequences of modules that build on
each other. The clinical faculty reviews
module offerings annually to ensure that
a broad distribution is available and that
offerings are publicized well in advance
to enable planning.
The flexibility of the module system can be
illustrated by listing representative titles
of modules.
Psychopathology modules
have usually been organized by diagnostic category
(Depression, Schizophrenia, Anxiety Disorders
and Phobias, Psychopathy), by problem (Suicide,
Child Abuse), by theoretical approach (Humanistic
Concepts of Psychopathology, Cognitive Theories
of Psychopathology), or by the intersection
of these (Family Theories of Schizophrenia,
Eating Disorders: Archetypal Perspectives,
Alcoholism: Disease Model and Family Dynamics).
Although most psychopathology modules have
been relatively focused, some have taken a
survey approach. For example, one offering
surveyed the DSM-III-R diagnostic system and
another has considered the DSM-III-R axis II
conceptualization. A sequence of modules, Issues
in Child Psychopathology I and II, created,
in effect, a 10-week survey course.
Theory of assessment modules
represent a new addition to the module system
and will replace a single required course.
Expected module titles include Correlations,
Bayesian Analysis, Human Judgment and Decision
Making, Theory of Test Construction, and History
of Major Assessment Projects. These modules
are aimed at providing a conceptual basis for
psychological assessment -- explicating the
fundamental means of describing relations among
things, examining what assessors do and how
assessment information is used, evaluating
the quality of information provided by particular
assessment techniques, and reviewing historical
uses and misuses of psychological assessment.
Methods of assessment modules
have often been organized by assessment instrument
(e.g., focusing on administration and interpretation
of the WAIS-R, the WISC-III, the MMPI, the
Rorschach, or the TAT). Instructors have often
offered two- or three-module sequences (Introduction,
Intermediate, Advanced) on the use of these
instruments, with students able to enroll in
one, two, or all three modules. Other assessment
modules have been organized by theoretical
approach (Cognitive Assessment, Behavioral
Assessment, Humanistic/Existential Approaches
to Assessment, Family Systems: Use of the Genogram,
Personal Construct Approaches to Assessment)
or by target group (Family Evaluation, Behavioral
Assessment of Children, Assessment of Social
Phobias, Use of the Playroom in Evaluating
Children, Neuropsychological Assessment). Still
others have dealt with more general issues
(Psychological Report Writing, Normative Assessment
Procedures, Legal Contexts).
Most assessment modules have a significant
practical component. Cases are found through
the Psychology Clinic, community agencies,
schools, or medical facilities in which students
are placed, or by other arrangements made by
the instructor. In some cases, the instructor
is also the clinical supervisor for the assessment
work, but in other instances the assessment
is done in conjunction with cases supervised
by others (e.g., in practicum courses or on
placements, as described later).
To provide predictability of offerings in
widely used types of assessment techniques,
at least one module (typically more than one)
in (a) intellectual assessment, (b) projective
testing, and (c) personality inventories is
offered every year, although the specific offerings
vary (e.g., Rorschach one year, TAT in another
year). Some other categories are offered at
least every 2 years. Although students are
not required to take any particular modules,
offerings in these standard techniques are
usually well enrolled by students who want
to be prepared for assessment tasks at traineeship
placements and internship agencies.
Intervention modules
focus on conceptual issues in psychotherapy
and other psychological interventions. They
generally do not involve practical experience,
which is provided by the practicum courses,
although there have been exceptions (e.g.,
a module on School Consultation). Some intervention
modules have been organized around theoretical
positions (Experiential Psychotherapy, Strategic
Therapy, Humanistic Concepts of the Therapeutic
Relationship), but, perhaps because most practicum
courses are organized in this way, intervention
modules have more often been framed in other
ways. Sample titles include Women and Psychotherapy,
Ethnicity and Psychotherapy, Treatment of Substance
Abuse, Couples Therapy, Treatment of Borderline
Disorders, Use of Clinical Hypnosis with Children,
Clinical Use of Dreams, Private Practice of
Clinical Psychology, Manualized Therapies for
Depression, Psychotherapy and Schizophrenia,
Psychotherapy Outcome and Process Research,
and Metaphor in Psychotherapy.
The module system accommodates the varied
and changing talents and interests of faculty
members. For example, each of us has different
interests and uses different approaches to
assessment. Teaching all approaches in a single
course or sequence would not allow students
to benefit from faculty members' interest in
new or evolving approaches as well as their
established expertise in particular techniques.
Further, the system offers a flexible way to
bring in outside experts. Adjunct faculty and
professionals in the community can be hired
to teach modules in specific areas of expertise,
and these brief courses are automatically integrated
into the program (i.e., they help meet requirements).
Module
offerings are responsive to student interests
in several ways. Highly enrolled
topics are offered more often. Faculty frequently
poll students before deciding which module
to offer, and new modules are created in response
to student interest.
Traineeship placements' and internship agencies'
preference for students acquainted with standard
instruments and procedures place a conservative
pressure on the module system by augmenting
student demand for training in traditional
skills. On the other hand, shifting interests
within the field and within society create
demand for new topics. The module system's
capacity to respond flexibly to both sorts
of demands -- offering extended training in
classical projective testing for students seeking
preparation for particular placements, for
example, or new modules in bulimia or in posttraumatic
stress disorder as such topics loom large in
the popular and professional literature --
represents a strength of the system's pluralistic
construction.
Practicum
Students are introduced to psychotherapeutic
approaches in a course officially titled
Advanced Clinical Techniques but known within
the program as practicum. We distinguish practicum (i.e.,
this course) from placement, which
has its more usual meaning of a traineeship
involving supervised practical experience
in a service agency. Practica are 2-
to 4-credit, semester-long courses; students
are required
to take at least 12 credits from at least
three different instructors.
Each practicum involves a combination
of didactic and practical training centered
around some
theme, most often a theoretical approach
to psychotherapy (Interpersonal Psychotherapy,
Personal Construct Approaches, Rational Emotive
Therapy, Client-Centered Therapy, Family
Systems
Approaches, Object Relations Approaches).
Typically, students are assigned readings
on the approach,
and some class time spent discussing the
theories. There may be required papers
integrating theory
with clinical material. In addition, students
practice the approach in the Psychology Clinic,
supervised by the course instructor. Thus,
a large portion of class time (and, frequently,
additional individually-scheduled time) is
devoted to supervision of cases.
Clinic intake interviews are done by
practicum
student therapists, supervised by their practicum
instructor. Thus, within the limits of basic
administrative procedures in the Clinic,
intake and referral philosophies and
practices may
differ across practica. If the presenting
problem is considered appropriate for
the practicum,
the client is offered treatment within that
practicum; otherwise, the client may be assigned
to a student therapist in another practicum
or referred to another agency. Clients whose
treatment extends beyond the end of the semester
may continue with the same student therapist
and supervisor (a course catalogue number
is provided for this purpose), though
sometimes
supervisory responsibility is transferred
to the instructor of the student's next
practicum.
(Such decisions are made on a case-by-case
basis through consultation among the student
therapists and supervisors involved.) Practicum
instructors are clinical faculty members,
all of whom are licensed for the practice
and supervision of clinical work in Ohio.
Practicum
teaching is rotated among the full-time faculty
members (N = 7 plus one vacancy at this writing),
with occasional offerings by adjunct faculty.
Two different practica are normally offered
each semester; thus, students can choose
among offerings by every member of the faculty
and
still complete the required 12 hours (three
4-hour practica or the equivalent) during
their second and third years (as is typical).
Class
size usually ranges from about 2 to 7. Students
typically begin taking practica in their
second year, although students with prior
clinical
experience occasionally begin in the second
semester of their first year.
In contrast to the more usual arrangements
for teaching psychotherapy (e.g., assigning
each student to a continuing supervisor,
to
a supervisory team, or to different supervisors
for different cases), our practicum system
promotes integration of theory with practice.
The simultaneous discussion of theoretical
readings and Clinic cases encourages an emphasis
on theoretical coherence in such clinical
decisions as case selection, initial arrangements,
case
planning and conceptualization, and moment-by-moment
interventions in treatment. The experience
students receive in practicum is only the
beginning of their training in
psychotherapy. They receive further training
and clinical supervision in clinical traineeship
placements and on internship.
back
to top
Structured Opportunities
for Comparison and Integration
Fundamentals of Clinical
Psychology. A "fundamentals" course,
which we recently expanded from one semester
to two,
is required of all clinical graduate students
in their first year. It is a 3-credit course
each
semester. (Normal full academic load for graduate
students is 10 to 13 credits per semester.) It
is intended to orient students to the program,
the department, and the profession, and to teach
basic interviewing skills, an overview of psychopathology,
ethical and legal issues, and issues in professional
development. It is also intended as a forum for
clinical students to discuss and integrate diverse
viewpoints they encounter in other parts of the
program during their first year. These viewpoints
include not only those presented in clinical
courses, but also those encountered in required
courses
in research methods and statistics. The latter
demand a lot of time in the first year and often
present students with epistemologies that seem
to conflict with those used in clinical settings.
Case conference. Another
opportunity for comparison and synthesis is
the Psychology Clinic's weekly case conference,
which is open to all clinical faculty and students
in the program. The presenter is usually a
student in one of the practicum courses or
on clinical placement, although faculty and
visitors present occasionally. Case conference
provides a forum for exposure to alternative
systems (i.e., systems used in practica being
taken by other students) and for discussion
and debate among faculty and students on the
merits of alternative approaches to assessment
and intervention in particular cases. In addition,
because case conference is attended by faculty
and students at all levels, it helps to foster
a sense of community within the program.
Clinical traineeship
placement. As in
many programs, beginning usually in their
third year, students take half-time paid
placements in agencies (clinics and hospitals)
in surrounding communities. Placement assignments
must be approved by the clinical faculty
and are negotiated among the agency, the
student, and the program. The agencies provide
supervision, so students are exposed to viewpoints
beyond those of the core faculty. In association
with their first year on placement, students
take two semesters of a 2-credit course called
Graduate Placement, which can serve, among
other things, as another forum for comparison
and integration.
Comprehensive
examinations. Doctoral
comprehensive examinations are individually
tailored. Students
write a summary of their education and
career goals and, with their adviser, develop
a
list of topics and associated readings
that advance those goals. When they feel
ready,
they are examined on those topics and readings
by a committee they choose in consultation
with their adviser. The examination includes
a written portion, in which students spend
2 days answering individualized questions
submitted by their committee, and an oral
portion, which typically follows up the
written questions, but may range widely.
In constructing
their reading lists and studying for "comps," students
often systematically explore theoretical
and technical alternatives introduced earlier
in their program.
back
to top
Evaluations
and Administrative Advantages
It seems safe to say that
the program's pluralistic philosophy
and practice are viewed as clear
strengths not only by applicants to the
program, incoming and advanced graduate
students,
and graduates, but by such external
evaluators as placement traineeship and
internship supervisors,
employers, and APA accreditation site visit
teams. For example, the most recent (1991)
APA accreditation site visit team's report
said, "The program appears to offer good breadth
[and] meet all the requirements for exposure
to multiple model and approaches, while at
the same time allowing for specialty skill
development and identity with a particular
approach or set of approaches to psychopathology,
assessment, and treatment. . . . Students report
being attracted to the program by its eclectic
clinical orientation and flexibility in program
options to meet individual interests. . . .
The quality and diversity of the combined department
clinic training and off-campus [placement]
is a definite strength of the program. . .
. The MU clinical students have been competitive
at the internship level and go to well recognized
APA Approved internships. From the reports
in the files, the students are viewed by the
internship supervisors as well trained and
successful interns. Most students appear to
obtain one of their top choice internships." Modules
and practica are compatible with conventional
university institutional structures and
procedures, and they offer some distinct
administrative
advantages. Denominated in 1-credit, 5-week
units, modules allow a more flexible adjustment
of teaching loads than do conventional
3-credit courses, yet they fit smoothly
into the semester/course
system and the rest of the university's
operations (advising, committee work, etc.).
As noted
earlier, they make it convenient to hire
outside experts to teach brief courses
in their specialty.
They make it administratively feasible
to provide small amounts of release time
from
teaching
for significant administrative responsibilities.
For example, the clinical graduate admissions
director can be given a 1-credit release
during the middle 5 weeks of spring semester
when
the responsibilities of monitoring receipt
of credentials, arranging interviews, telephoning,
and so forth, are heaviest. Faculty members
can schedule a lighter load during a particular
5-week period when research or conferences
may call them out of town and compensate
by teaching two modules in a different
5-week period. Because several instructors
offer
modules
in any one semester, scheduling can be
balanced so that offerings are spread more
or less
evenly across the academic year. The practicum
course format for offering clinical supervision
within
the usual 2- to 4-credit,
one-semester course forestalls debates
about the appropriate teaching credit for
clinical
activities. The practicum course's combined
didactic-practical emphasis is consistent
with the values of many nonclinical academicians.
back
to top
Some
Potential Pitfalls
Even when faculty individually
and the program collectively stress respect
for the potential
value in alternative approaches, students,
particularly beginning students, often seem
uneasy at not finding an agreed-upon position.
They may either have the impression that
one approach must be right and thus the
others
must be wrong or that any approach is as
good as any other and none of them is
really very
good. It is not
clear whether the confusion many
students experience in the early part of
their practicum training is a distinctive
effect
of our pluralistic program or more generally
characteristic of entry into the field of
clinical psychology (or reflective of
common stages
of intellectual development; Belenky, Clinchy,
Goldberger, & Tarnule, 1986; Perry, 1970).
Despite assurances that they have the right
to their own synthesis, and structured opportunities
for comparison and integration, novices may
view presentations of alternatives as conflicting
orders. Our practicum system sharpens the contrast
by emphasizing the internal consistency of
theoretical systems and, hence, their sometimes
conflicting implications for clinical action.
Despite the initial, sometimes painful confusion,
however, reports from placement supervisors,
from advanced students, and from graduates
indicate to us that this pluralistic education
has its intended effect of giving students
a sophistication and a broad perspective on
the diversity of the field. The program's pluralism
sometimes seems to work against faculty consensus
on matters of
student evaluation, because definitions of
what constitutes success or excellence may
differ across theoretical traditions.
Perhaps the greatest risk in a pluralistic
program, as in our diverse discipline generally
(Fowler, 1990; Staats, 1991), is loss of mutual
respect, leading to factionalism, competition
for students' loyalties, and isolation. As
Kessen said, "It's perfectly all right for
people to till their own garden, but once in
a while they are going to have to talk over
the fence" (Bronfenbrenner, Kessel, Kessen, & White,
1986, p. 1224). Structural arrangements (e.g.,
case conferences, regular faculty meetings,
more extended faculty-student retreats) can
improve the chances for dialogue, but, like
democracy, pluralism has a price -- eternal
vigilance by all concerned, so that open
communication and mutual respect are maintained.
Participation
in such dialogue may be the best education
we can provide students as they prepare for
professional life in an increasingly pluralistic
postmodern (Gergen, 1991) world.
back
to top
References
American Psychological Association (1986).
American Psychological Association accreditation
handbook. Washington DC: Author
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger,
N. R., & Tarnule, J. M. (1986). Women's
ways of knowing. New York: Basic Books.
Bickman, L., & Ellis, H. (1990). (Eds.).
Preparing psychologists for the 21st century:
Proceedings of the National Conference
on Graduate Education in Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bronfenbrenner, U., Kessel, F., Kessen, W., & White,
S. (1986). Toward a critical social history
of developmental psychology: A propaedeutic
discussion. American Psychologist, 41, 1218-1230.
Carroll, L. (1946). Alice's adventures
in wonderland. New York: Random House. (Original
work published 1865)
Derner, G. F. (1965). Graduate education in
clinical psychology. In B. B. Wolman (Ed.),
Handbook of clinical psychology (pp. 1403-1414).
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Engel, G. L. (1980). The clinical application
of the biopsychosocial model. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 137, 535-544.
Fowler, R. D. (1990). Psychology: The core
discipline. American Psychologist, 45, 1-6.
Frank, J. D. (1973). Persuasion and healing:
A comparative study of psychotherapy (rev.
ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
Gergen, K. J. (1991). The saturated self:
Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life.
New York: Basic Books.
Goldstein, G., & Hersen, M. (1990). Handbook
of psychological assessment (2nd ed.). New
York: Pergamon.
Grencavage, L. M., & Norcross, J. C. (1990).
Where are the commonalities among the therapeutic
common factors? Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 21, 372-378.
Herink, R. (Ed.). (1980). The psychotherapy
handbook. New York: Meridian.
Karasu, T. B. (1986). The specificity versus
nonspecificity dilemma: Toward identifying
therapeutic change agents. American Journal
of Psychiatry, 143, 687-695.
Luborsky, L., Singer, B., & Luborsky,
L. (1975). Comparative studies of psychotherapies:
Is it true that "Everyone has won and all must
have prizes"? Archives of General Psychiatry,
32, 995-1008.
Matarazzo, J. D. (1990). Psychological assessment
versus psychological testing. American
Psychologist,
45, 999-1017.
Meehl, P. E. (1954). Clinical versus statistical
prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review
of the evidence. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Messer, S. B. (1986). Eclecticism in psychotherapy:
Underlying assumptions, problems, and trade-offs.
In J. C. Norcross (Ed.), Handbook of eclectic
psychotherapy (pp. 379-397). New York: Bruner/Mazel.
Norcross, J. C. (Ed.). (1986). Handbook
of eclectic psychotherapy New York: Bruner/Mazel.
Perry, W. (1970). Forms of intellectual
and ethical development in the college years. New
York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Raimy, V. C. (Ed.). (1950). Training in
clinical psychology (Boulder conference). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Rosenzweig, S. (1936). Some implicit common
factors in diverse methods of psychotherapy.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 6, 412-415.
Sattler, J. M. (1990). Assessment of children (3rd ed.). San Diego, CA: Jerome M. Sattler.
Schwartz, G. E. (1982). Testing the biopsychosocial
model: The ultimate challenge facing behavioral
medicine? Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 50, 1040-1053.
Shakow, D. (1945). Training in clinical psychology:
A note on trends. Journal of Consulting
Psychology,
9, 240-242.
Staats, A. W. (1991). Unified positivism and
unification of psychology: Fad or new field?
American Psychologist, 46, 899-912.
Stiles, W. B., Shapiro, D. A., & Elliott,
R. (1986). "Are all psychotherapies equivalent?" American
Psychologist, 41, 165-180.
Vyse, S. A. (1990). Adopting a viewpoint:
Psychology majors and psychological theory.
Teaching of Psychology, 17, 227-230.
Author
Note
