This document was created by Stephen Foley, based on an original draft started by the Working Group on the National Standards for High School Psychology Curricula from the 2017 APA Summit on High School Psychology Curricula. Working group members were Amy Fineburg, co-chair; Tina Athanasopoulos, co-chair; Stephen Foley, Terri Lindenberg, Tomee Pace, Chuck Schallhorn, Casey Swanson, Rik Seefelt and Terry Wick.
The American Psychological Association’s Summit on High School Psychology Education was convened in July 2017 at Weber State University. During the summit, participants in eight working groups developed teaching resources and made recommendations to advance the mission of the summit. With the current "APA National Standards for High School Psychology Curricula" set to expire in 2020, participants in the Strand Three working group assembled a framework for the new edition of the national standards, set to go into effect in 2021. In developing that framework, the working group on Strand Three put forth several recommendations. I will discuss two of those recommendations here: That the next national standards increase the emphasis on the scientific basis of psychology and more clearly reflect its nature as a scientific discipline, first through alignment to the "Next Generation Science Standards" (NGSS) science practices and second, through alignment to the NGSS Crosscutting Concepts.
As part of our effort to chart the course of psychology teaching in high schools for the coming decade and to support Strand One’s mission of championing psychology as a science, Strand Three examined the National Science Teachers Association’s "Next Generation Science Standards" (NGSS Lead States, 2013). The NGSS factored into our framework in several ways; but in this article, I will first consider how we explained the ways in which psychological science uses the "NGSS Science and Engineering Practices in K-12 Classrooms" (National Research Council, 2012). Though many psychologists and psychology teachers will find it obvious that psychological science uses these practices just as much as other sciences taught in K-12 schools, I undertake to make it equally clear to those outside of psychology that these practices are core to the discipline and that courses in psychological science at the secondary level teach these practices to students. Here, I give a brief defense of how each of the scientific practices relates to psychological science as taught in secondary schools.
- “Asking questions (for science) and defining problems (for engineering)” (National Research Council, 2012)
Psychological science aims to uncover the psychological, biological and sociocultural reasons for mental processes and behaviors. In an effort to understand the above, psychologists ask well-posed questions with empirical answers that can be understood by gathering and interpreting evidence. - “Developing and using models” (National Research Council, 2012)
Psychological science makes extensive use of models throughout the discipline. Psychologists generate hypotheses, test them and use the results to refine the original, hypothetical models. Further testing of the models is conducted with different populations and variables to refine and adapt the models as needed. - “Planning and carrying out investigations” (National Research Council, 2012)
The core of psychological science is the use of the scientific method. Defining hypotheses, operationally defining variables, using appropriate methods (qualitative and quantitative), respecting ethical parameters, analyzing results and presenting those results for review are all hallmarks of psychological science. The corpus of psychological knowledge is built upon scientific results. - Analyzing and interpreting data” (National Research Council, 2012)
Psychologists produce evidence-based conclusions using analysis and interpretation of available data. In analyzing data, psychologists apply statistical techniques to determine what the data may mean — this may involve searching for trends among the data, controlling for extraneous factors influencing the data or modeling the data. In interpreting data, psychologists seek to place these conclusions in theoretical context — once they see what the data say, they must further decide how that affects their prior knowledge. Combined, these practices allow psychologists to transform data into useful information, adding to the body of scientific knowledge in psychology. - “Mathematical and computational thinking” (National Research Council, 2012)
Psychologists use a multitude of mathematical tools for psychological science. In addition to many means of gathering data and the rules of scientific inference, psychologists also may use statistical, mathematical and computational methods in the course of their research. Tools of statistical analysis are integral to data processing and interpretation. Psychological scientists use many of these techniques to understand and clarify the relationships among studied variables and also to prepare data distributions for quick summary. Mathematical tools often play a role in the description or modeling of psychological properties. Some psychological phenomena (Weber’s law, for example) follow orderly, nomological patterns that can be neatly described as mathematical formulae that express the relationship among each of their member variables. Researchers may also construct mathematical models based on prior observations of psychological phenomena to attempt to predict future states of those variables or they may use a model of this kind to search for extraneous variables when the actual results obtained under study differ from those predicted by the model. Computational methods assist the progress of psychological science in a variety of ways. Increasing computational power permits psychologists to analyze ever-larger data sets with progressively more variables, which allows for increasingly complex and nuanced investigations into mental processes and behavior. Psychologists may create computer models of psychological phenomena, allowing them to gather data and test hypotheses that otherwise may be difficult, impossible or unethical to examine. These simulated environments can yield data unobtainable under normal conditions. - “Constructing explanations (for science) and designing solutions (for engineering)” (National Research Council, 2012)
Psychological science aims both to explain mental and behavioral phenomena using the scientific method and also to solve myriad applied problems. Basic research in psychology seeks to develop robust theories with sophisticated explanatory power, and applied research in psychology turns that knowledge into useful interventions. - “Engaging in argument from evidence” (National Research Council, 2012)
Claims in psychological science derive their merit from the evidence upon which they are based. Researchers in the field publish research in peer-reviewed journals so that others may evaluate their claims and critique their methodologies. - “Obtaining, evaluating and communicating information” (National Research Council, 2012)
After developing knowledge through the practices outlined above, the psychology discourse community effectively communicates new knowledge to academia, to industry, to individuals and to the public.
Though the NGSS Scientific Practices are not the demarcation criteria for what counts as science, if psychologists and psychology teachers know how psychological science utilizes these practices, they may be better prepared to make the case that psychology is a science deserving of recognition as such in the K-12 curriculum. Much more could be said about how psychological science relies on any of these practices, but these arguments communicate the essential ways in which psychology uses scientific practices.
Now I will consider how we explained the ways in which psychological science reflects the same crosscutting concepts (National Research Council, 2012) found in other K-12 sciences. The seven crosscutting concepts found in the NGSS describe common themes found across the traditional core scientific disciplines. Even a cursory evaluation reveals that psychological science shares these commonalities with other sciences.
- “Patterns. Observed patterns of forms and events guide organization and classification, and they prompt questions about relationships and the factors that influence them” (National Research Council, 2012).
Psychological science seeks to identify patterns in behavior and mental processes, and as such, all theoretical perspectives in psychology are based on organizing and classifying observations of behavior and mental processes. Psychological science uses tools, such as inferential and descriptive statistics, to differentiate meaningful versus chance patterns, in both correlation and causal vectors. - “Cause and effect: Mechanism and explanation. A major activity of science is investigating and explaining causal relationships and the mechanisms by which they are mediated. Such mechanisms can then be tested across given contexts and used to predict and explain events in new contexts” (National Research Council, 2012).
Though not all psychological science investigates cause and effect (which is also true of other sciences), through use of experimental designs, psychologists study cause and effect in psychological phenomena. This can sometimes be more complicated in psychological science than in other sciences because of the number of equifinal variables determining the outcome of a psychological process, but the same scientific techniques for investigating and determining the role of multiple causal agents are used in psychology as in other sciences. - “Scale, proportion and quantity. In considering phenomena, it is critical to recognize what is relevant at different measures of size, time and energy, and to recognize how changes in scale, proportion or quantity affect a system’s structure or performance” (National Research Council, 2012).
Psychological science investigates the role of varying quantities in affecting psychological phenomena. For examples, psychologists study the degree to which the relative contributions of individual and environmental factors interact in determining psychological phenomena, how changes in the magnitude of a sensory stimulus affect perception, and what role changing quantities of endogenous or exogenous psychoactive chemicals play in altering states of consciousness. - “Systems and system models. Defining the system under study-specifying its boundaries and making explicit a model of that system-provides tools for understanding and testing ideas that are applicable throughout science and engineering” (National Research Council, 2012).
Psychological science produces models of psychological phenomena for these purposes. Examples include models of sensory-perceptual mechanisms, of working memory and of attentional selection. Psychological scientists use these and other models to develop stronger theories of how these processes work and how they explain observed behavior. Further, psychological science studies these phenomena at varying levels of abstraction, one of which is a context-rich, sociocultural view, which places emphasis on the role of broader systemic factors in determining individual behavior. - “Energy and matter: Flows, cycles and conservation. Tracking fluxes of energy and matter into, out of, and within systems helps one understand the systems’ possibilities and limitations” (National Research Council, 2012).
Psychological science contains several topics of study that explicitly involve changes and transfers of energy, such as neural processes or sensory transduction. Other topics in psychological science require a systemic view of energy changes in a human or nonhuman organism, such as the mutually causal relationship between psychological states and the endocrine system. - “Structure and function. The way in which an object or living thing is shaped and its substructure determine many of its properties and functions” (National Research Council, 2012).
Psychological science explicitly studies the relationship between body structures and psychological phenomena and the relationship between the individual and its sociocultural context. Both involve assessments of the interactions of structure and function. For example, psychological science investigates the role of brain structures in producing particular behaviors as well as the way that organizational structure influences the behavior of individual group members. - “Stability and change. For natural and built systems alike, conditions of stability and determinants of rates of change or evolution of a system are critical elements of study” (National Research Council, 2012).
Psychological science studies both dynamic and stable phenomena, seeking to identify what differentiates the two and what factors affect their respective rates of change. These factors may include time, experience and context. Developmental research, for example, seeks to determine which psychological phenomena remain stable over the lifespan and which fluctuate.
The NGSS Crosscutting Concepts identify important ideas encountered in each area of K-12 science study. It should be clear, too, that psychological science shares this core with other sciences, and that for these most essential ideas, psychology has great conceptual commonality with the science curriculum. Psychologists and psychology teachers both should consider how greater, more perspicuous alignment of the psychology curriculum with these crosscutting concepts may clarify psychology’s nature as a science to various audiences.
The members of the Strand Three working group planned for these two alignments between the coming national standards and the NGSS Scientific Practices and Crosscutting Concepts in order to reduce the friction between those advocating for psychology’s recognition as a science and those who question it. Psychologists and teachers of psychology can use these arguments about how the NGSS Scientific Practices and Crosscutting Concepts apply to psychological science to demonstrate how and why psychology is and should be counted as science. It should be possible to generate an effective defense of this point by asking if scientists, curriculum experts, school administrators, and others agree that the NGSS documents accurately capture what it means for a discipline to be taught as a science at the K-12 level; upon their likely agreement with that statement, the arguments presented here can be marshalled to show that psychology should be included by that criterion.
References
National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.17226/13165.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.17226/18290.
About the author
Stephen Foley is part of the faculty at The Linsly School in Wheeling, West Virginia, where he is in his sixth year teaching advanced placement psychology. He contributed to the APA Summit for High School Psychology Education in 2017 on Strand Three, the national standards strand, and he serves as a member of the APA's National Standards for High School Psychology Curricula Working Group. Stephen also reads Advanced Placement Psychology exams for the College Board. Recently, Stephen wrote a set of psychology lab exercises to accompany Charlie Blair-Broeker and Randy Ernst’s new 4th edition of "Thinking About Psychology" with Bedford, Freeman, and Worth Publishers.