A plAn for AuthoritAtive teAching

the cornerstone of authoritative teaching is treating students as responsible adults. This means giving them clear and comprehensive information about your

course, including your teaching philosophy and rules, what you will be covering, how you will cover it, and an outline of their rights and obligations. It also means keeping your end of the bargain and holding students responsible for keeping theirs.

the first dAy of clAssEstablishing your role as an authoritative teacher begins on the first day of class. When you distribute your syllabus,

describe it as a contract between you and your students and review it in detail. This review can serve as an introduction and illustration of your teaching methods and goals.

For example, if one of your goals is to promote independent learning, critical thinking, or teamwork, highlight the fact that your lectures will be frequently supplemented (perhaps sometimes even replaced) with class discussions and group activities in which everyone is expected to take an active part. If advance reading or other preparation is required to partic-ipate in and benefit from these discussions and activities, let students know that, but you don’t have to repeatedly remind students to complete assigned readings or award points for doing so. Just make the assignments, explain their impor-

continued on page 3

1 The author wishes to thank Victor Benassi, William Buskist, Sandra Goss-Lucas, Robert Hendersen and Doris Vasconcellos for their helpful com-ments and suggestions during the development of this manuscript.

pArt 2—pArenting And teAching: WhAt’s the connection in our clAssrooMs?1

in pArt 2 of this tWo-pArt series, the Author shAres ideAs for becoMing An AuthoritAtive teAcher.

Douglas a. Bernstein, PhD university of south Florida

deceMber 2013 vol. 23, no. 3

2

contentsPart 2 of 2: Parenting and teaching: What’s the connection in our classrooms? .......................................Cover

The ethics of grading ............................................................................. 6

Does the MMR vaccine cause autism? Assessing the science ................... 9

Psychology and the College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework ..... 15

Harnessing the potential of Introductory Psychology: The Stanford Psychology One Conference ........................................... 19

neWs froM topss And pt@cc

APA TOPSS Excellence in Teaching Awards: Introducing the 2013 winners ............................................................. 17

PT@CC Comittee election results announced ...................................... 22

Announcing the 2014 PT@CC Student Presentation Contest .............. 22

PT@CC seeking nominations for award .............................................. 22

2014 TOPSS Excellence in Teaching Awards call for nominations ........ 23

TOPSS Committee election results announced .................................... 23

APA TOPSS Competition for High School Psychology Students ......... 23

booK revieW

Musicophilia: Tales of music and the brain ...................................................21

MArK your cAlendAr

Don’t miss this opportunity in 2014: APA Convention ......................... 23

2014 Meetings of the regional psychological associations ...................... 24

Association for Psychological Science Convention ................................ 24

NITOP January 2014: There’s still time to register ............................... 24

other neWs

APF High School Psychology Teacher Network grants ......................... 14

BEA offers grants for 2014 teaching conferences .................................. 14

APF announces professional development awards for high school psychology teachers ........................................................... 16

ptn DECEMBER 2013 Vol. 23, No. 3

psychology teAcher netWorK is published quarterly by the Education Directorate of the American Psychological Association (APA). Subscriptions are free to high school and community college teacher affiliates of APA and APA members.

Address editoriAl correspondence to:

Psychology teacher network

APA Education Directorate

750 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20002-4242

(202) 572-3013

Address inquiries regarding

membership or affiliation to the

APA Membership Office at the

same address.

ptn design by

Elizabeth Woodcock,

Graphic Designer

APA Editorial and Design Services

coeditorsMartha Boenau mboenau@apa.org

emily leary Chesnes eleary@apa.org

robin hailstorks, PhD

rhailstorks@apa.org

contributing editorspt@cc Craig Cowden, PhD ccowden@tacomacc.edu

topss Maria Vitamaria.vita@pennmanor.net

3 bAcK to contents

tance, and let students who fail to complete them discover and deal with the consequences.

When reviewing course requirements and how final grades will be determined, give students a chance to ask ques-tions. Present course information and answer questions in a friendly, matter-of-fact manner, without apology. Further, be honest about the amount of work that will be required to do well in your class. Support their confidence by noting that success in the course is common among motivated students, but don’t underplay the effort that will be necessary. In particular, let students know that there will not be enough class time or lab time to address all the concepts, theories, applications and other information that you expect them to learn. Spell out the implications of this fact, namely that though you will spend your class time teaching, the respon-sibility for learning lies with the students, not you, and that much of this learning will have to take place independent-ly or in student-organized study groups. The opportunity for students to display that learning will come through the writing assignments, quizzes, exams and other performance measures you provide for them. (You might reinforce the need for independent learning by giving students a low-cost failure experience early in the course, such as a challenging, but droppable, quiz based mainly on material that was not covered in class.) Make it clear that your grading system rewards achievement rather than effort. It is important to be explicit about this aspect of authoritative teaching because, as already noted, many of today’s students expect that work-ing hard to learn things is worth as much as actually learning things (Zinn, 2009).

Spending at least part of the first day of class reviewing the syllabus and establishing expectations has the added advantage of heading off or at least minimizing many of the student behaviors that professors complain about. Does class attendance matter to you? Should students raise a hand to be recognized before commenting or asking a question? Is eating or drinking in class permitted? How about checking email, texting or web-surfing? Point out your policies and

where they appear in the syllabus. Pay special attention to how you will handle requests for make-up exams, questions about the scoring of exam items, requests for extra credit or special arrangements and complaints about grades.1

The more explicit your written rules and policies are, the fewer difficulties you will have later on when you apply them. And don’t assume that students will already know even the most fundamental rules, such as those regarding plagiarism or other aspects of academic dishonesty. For some students, rules that seem intuitively obvious to you may be utterly new to them — especially if they are accustomed to a permissive–indulgent learning environment. If you make it clear through your demeanor that the course is planned as it is for good reasons, and you state those reasons, students are likely to recognize your authority and not try to nego-tiate with you (Roosevelt, 2009). In fact, students prefer predictability and structure in their courses, and they want that structure to come from you, not from the results of class votes or compromises hashed out in class between the teach-er and the class’s most aggressive or demanding members (Scholl-Buckwald, 1985).

Finally, let students know that your office hours, email address and other contact details are listed on the syllabus because part of your job is to answer questions, discuss course material, of-fer advice, recommend supplemental information sources and provide other kinds of help to those who ask for it.

For the student, entering an authoritative learning environ-ment should be like joining a gym. In exchange for a fee and their agreement to abide by certain reasonable rules and policies, student members gain access to a complete array of exercise facilities, as well as to the help, advice and supervi-1 For example, no one likes the hassle of giving make-up quiz-

zes, but whereas an authoritarian teacher might simply punish missed quizzes with a zero, an authoritative professor might not count students’ one or two lowest quiz scores. This policy recognizes the realities of student life while greatly reducing the demand for make-up quizzes and the need to adjudicate student excuses.

continued from page 1

continued on page 4

Make it clear that your grading sys-tem rewards achievement rather than effort. It is important to be explic-it about this aspect of authoritative teaching because, as already noted, many of today’s students expect that working hard to learn things is worth as much as actually learning things.

In fact, students prefer predictabili-ty and structure in their courses, and they want that structure to come from you, not from the results of class votes or compromises hashed out in class be-tween the teacher and the class’s most aggressive or demanding members

4 bAcK to contents

sion of fitness experts and the company and support of other members with similar goals. Everything they need to succeed is available 7 days a week, maybe 24 hours a day, and though the least fit members may initially need the most help, the results each person ultimately achieves depends almost entirely on whether, how and how diligently he or she takes advantage of what the gym has to offer.2

reAl And iMAgined obstAcles to AuthoritAtive teAchingMany teachers are attracted to the idea of creating an au-thoritative classroom environment filled with opportunities for active learning, but some don’t think they can do so because they have too many students and/or because most of those students are not interested enough or motivated enough or academically prepared enough or mature enough to successfully tackle active, independent learning challenges. Further, this kind of teaching requires students (and teach-ers) to work harder, so some teachers are concerned that stu-dents who are unhappy with added learning responsibilities will punish the teacher with negative course evaluations.

However, many and perhaps most students who encounter an active-learning classroom organized by an authoritative teacher will eventually be glad to have had the experience. Some will even thank you for it, though perhaps not im-mediately. Here is part of what a student wrote to me a few years after enrolling in my honors Introductory Psychology course at the University of Illinois: “When I took your class, I hated you, and I hated the way you made us work like dogs. But by the end, even though I only got a B, I felt proud be-cause this was a major accomplishment. It was the first time I realized that I have what it takes to do just about anything I set my mind to. Now that I have nearly completed medical school, I realize how valuable your course and your teaching methods were. I am sorry I was such a pain in the ass.”

Perhaps it reflects confirmation bias, but to me the message in this letter is that students — all students — should be

2 This analogy was suggested to me by Alison Hagood during a discussion at the 2009 National Institute on the Teaching of Psychology, St. Pete Beach, Florida.

challenged to learn things for themselves and in the process stretch themselves to explore the limits of their academ-ic ability. Authoritative teaching can help them to do this. So instead of planning courses based on what we think our students can handle, and thus allow them to remain in their educational comfort zone, consider pushing them beyond it. Consider helping them discover what they are capable of doing instead of letting them do what they have always done. In classes large or small, live or online, most students will rise to the challenges we set for them (Timpson & Ben-del-Simso, 1996).

What about those who can’t, or don’t want to, handle the workload your course requires? Let students know on that first day that if they think your course is not for them they can drop it, but invite them to come and see you. If they do, treat them as responsible adults. Talk to them about their career plans and their motivation to achieve their goals. Perhaps they should consider a different course, a different major or even a different life plan. The fact is that not ev-eryone has to major in your discipline, or even go to college, to have a good life, and not everyone who enrolls in college belongs there. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statis-tics, of the 30 job categories projected to grow at the fastest rate over the next decade, only 7 require a college degree, and among the 10 fastest growing categories, only 2 require a postsecondary degree (Steinberg, 2010). In fact, about 66 percent of all jobs in the U.S. are open to those without a bachelor’s degree (Symonds, Schwartz, & Ferguson, 2011).

True, among people over 25, the median annual income of college graduates is about 65 percent higher than that of those who graduated only from high school, and their life-time income will be about $1 million more (Baum, Ma, & Payea, 2010), but part of the difference is accounted for by the fact that many people whose formal education stopped after high school do not have the capacity or motivation to be successful at higher-paying occupations that don’t require a bachelor’s degree. The story is different for people who choose a path to success that includes training of some kind but does not require 4 years of college. Many plumbers, elec-tricians, carpenters, beauticians, salespeople and chefs, for example, earn more than many college graduates in their age group and — especially if they own their own businesses — may enjoy greater autonomy.

Indeed, many students enter higher education only because they don’t know what else to do, because their families have pushed them toward a certain career or because of more general societal pressure to obtain a college degree. This lack of direction probably contributes significantly to the fact that average graduation rates in the United States now hover around 56 percent at 4-year institutions and around 30 percent at community colleges (Carey, 2008; Symonds,

continued from page 3

continued on page 5

However, many and perhaps most students who encounter an active-learning classroom organized by an authoritative teacher will eventually be glad to have had the experience.

5 bAcK to contents

Schwartz, & Ferguson, 2011). As a matter of fact, the United States has the highest college dropout rate of any country in the industrialized world (Symonds, Schwartz, & Ferguson, (2011). Sadly, many dropouts come to think of themselves as failures when the truth is they simply made a bad career choice. Some of them might have been more motivated, and happier, in a high-school or postsecondary vocational or career-oriented associate of arts program of some kind.

concluding thoughtsStudents differ greatly in terms of academic preparation, study skills and level of interest in learning and though it makes sense to plan courses with these background factors in mind, authoritative teachers don’t let pessimistic expectations about students’ abilities and motivation create self-fulfilling prophesies. They maintain their standards. They do not cut back on active learning methods, water down course content or reduce demands for student achievement, and they cer-tainly don’t make such adjustments on an individual basis.

For one thing, fairness demands that all students be required to meet the same standards. It is obviously necessary (and le-gally required) to alter assessment procedures or other aspects of a course for students with documented physical or cognitive disabilities, but caving in to individual students’ requests for special treatment based on their perceived learning styles or assessment preferences is inappropriate and counterproduc-tive. Authoritative teachers can better promote their students’ success — in higher education and in their future occupational and personal lives — by helping them understand that to sur-vive, thrive and prosper in the real world, they will often have to adjust to the needs and demands of that world, which at the moment happens to include the requirements of their courses. Students will never find out how much they can accomplish unless they are required to try, so teachers do them no favors by making their academic lives too easy. ptn

referencesBaum, S., Ma, J., & Payea, K. (2010). Education pays 2010: The benefits

of higher education for individuals and society. New York, NY: The College Board Advocacy and Policy Center.

Carey, K. (2008, April). Graduation rate watch (Education Sector Re-port). Washington, DC: Education Sector.

Roosevelt, M. (2009, February 18). Student expectations seen as causing grade disputes. The New York Times, p. A15.

Scholl-Buckwald, S. (1985). The first meeting of the class. In J. Katz (Ed.), Teaching as though students mattered: New directions for teaching and learning (pp. 13-21). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Steinberg, J. (2010, May 16). Plan B: Skip college. The New York Times, p. WK1.

Symonds, W. C., Schwartz, R.B., & Ferguson, R. (2011). Pathways to prosperity: Meeting the challenge of preparing young Americans for the 21st century. Report issued by the Pathways to Prosperity Project, Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news_events/features/2011/Pathways_to_Prosperi-ty_Feb2011.pdf

Timpson, W. M., & Bendel-Simso, P. (1996). Concepts and choices for teaching: Meeting the challenges in higher education. Madison, WI: Magna Publications, Inc.

Zinn, T. E. (2009). But I really tried! Helping students link effort and performance. APS Observer, 22, 27-30.

continued from page 4

About the AuthorDoug Bernstein received his bachelor’s degree in psychology at the University of Pittsburgh in 1964 and his master’s and PhD in clinical psychology at Northwestern University in 1966 and 1968, respectively. From 1968 to 1998, he was on the psychology faculty at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where he taught graduate and undergraduate classes ranging from 15 to 750 students and served both as Associate Department Head and Director of Introductory Psychology. He is now Professor Emeritus at Illinois and Courtesy Professor of Psychology at the University of South Florida. In 2013, he stepped down after 30 years as chairman of the National Institute on the Teaching of Psychology. He also founded the APS Preconference Institute on the Teaching of Psychology. His teaching awards include the University of Illinois Psychology Graduate Student Association Teaching Award and the University of Illinois Psi Chi award for excellence in undergraduate teaching, both in 1979; the Illinois Psychology Department’s Mabel Kirkpatrick Hohenboken Teaching Award in 1993; and the APA Distinguished Teaching in Psychology Award in 2002. He is a fellow of the Associ-ation for Psychological Science, and he has co-authored textbooks in Introductory Psychology, Abnormal Psychology, Clinical Psychology, Criminal Behavior, and Progressive Relaxation Training and, with Sandra Goss Lucas, wrote Teaching Psychology: A Step-by-Step Guide.

doug bernstein

Students will never find out how much they can accomplish unless they are required to try, so teachers do them no favors by making their academic lives too easy.

6 bAcK to contents continued on page 7

o f all the activities teachers engage in on a regular basis, grading is probably not one that would win the award for “Most Enjoyable Teaching Activity.”

In fact, although most teachers view grading as important (Saville, 2013; Walvoord & Anderson, 2010), I would be willing to bet that for many, the process of grading often produces feelings of dislike or even dread. There are likely many reasons for the less-than-pleasurable reaction grading evokes. Personally, I tend not to enjoy grading as much as I probably should for two primary reasons. First, it often takes me away from other activities I enjoy more: writing, designing a study, prepping for class, advising students, reading an interesting journal article, and chatting with colleagues in the hallway (the latter of which I tend to do a bit too often). Second, grading can be downright frustrating. I can’t count the number of times I’ve been grading essay exams and said to myself, “I never said THAT in class!” It seems that for every good answer I grade, there are nearly as many that make me wonder whether my students ever listen to me in class. I’m sure readers of this column can come up with many other reasons why they don’t enjoy grading.

Nevertheless, even though the very process of grading can send some teachers on an emotional roller coaster, most probably view it as a relatively benign activity, certainly one that doesn’t evoke the kinds of ethical concerns that other teaching-related activities do. In fact, when taken at face value, there’s (seemingly) not much to grading: Take a stack

of papers, mark some multiple-choice questions correct or incorrect, comment on some essay questions, and (after far too many hours) you’re done! In short, given its ostensibly harmless nature, I would be willing to bet many teachers spend little time considering the ethics of grading. But in the paragraphs that follow, I hope to convince you that teachers should consider the ethics of grading just as much as—if not more than—other activities that tend to receive the bulk of consideration when the topic of ethics comes up.

ApA’s ethics code: A brief overvieWBefore delving into the ethics of grading, I want to provide a brief overview of APA’s guidelines for ethical practice. The American Psychological Association’s (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (hereafter the “Ethics Code”; APA, 2010) consists of five general principles and 10 standards, the standards made up of a number of specific recommendations for guiding ethical decision making and resolving ethical dilemmas. Whereas the five general principles—beneficence and nonmaleficence, fidelity and responsibility, integrity, justice, and respect for people’s rights—are aspirational in nature, the ethical standards are more detailed and provide the basis for professional sanctions. The Ethics Code, in its various reincarnations, has provided guidance to practicing psychologists for well over 50 years; its most recent large-scale revision occurred in 2002, and additional amendments to the 2002 version occurred in 2010.

the ethics of grAding

teAchers should consider the ethics of grAding

BrYan K. saVille, PhD

James Madison university

7 bAcK to contents

continued from page 6

continued on page 8

Although the 89 recommendations in the Ethics Code (many of which actually include multiple subrecommendations) cover a relatively large amount of information relevant to clinicians and other practicing psychologists—for example, there are sections in the Ethics Code for “Privacy and Confidentiality,” “Record Keeping and Fees,” “Assessment,” and “Therapy”—they contain relatively little information for teachers who need to resolve ethical dilemmas that arise either inside or outside the classroom. With regard to the general area of “Education and Training,” the Ethics Code contains seven recommendations; and of those seven recommendations, only one really pertains to grading. Specifically, Standard 7.06 of the Ethics Code, Assessing Student and Supervisee Performance, states the following:

• In academic and supervisory relationships, psychologists establish timely and specific process for providing feedback to students and supervisees. Information regarding the process is provided to the student at the beginning of supervision. [Translation: Grade as quickly as possible and let students know in advance the criteria you are going to use to grade their assignments.]

• Psychologists evaluate students and supervisees on the basis of their actual performance on relevant and established program requirements. [Translation: Make sure students’ grades accurately reflect what they actually learned.]

Other than these two recommendations, the Ethics Code is essentially devoid of information that might provide teachers with instruction on how to resolve grading-related ethical dilemmas.

the ethics code: Why so little eMphAsis on grAding?So why is it the Ethics Code contains so little information on grading-related issues? Well, maybe it’s simply a sign that most psychologists don’t view grading as an important ethical concern. Although that is certainly one possibility, fortunately, it doesn’t seem to be the case. In one relevant study, Tabachnick, Keith-Spiegel, and Pope (1991) found that over 80% of the teachers they surveyed viewed grading-related activities, such as ignoring cheating and using invalid grading procedures, as important ethical issues. Rather, the lack of emphasis on the ethics of grading, both in the Ethics Code and in the research literature (see Saville, 2013), seems to be because teachers simply don’t see grading as carrying the same “ethical weight” as other activities in which psychologists have the opportunity to engage (e.g., Barrett, Headley, Stovall, & Witte, 2006). Certainly, adding a point or two to a student’s exam grade pales in comparison to engaging in a sexual relationship with a student or publishing forged data, right? Or does it?

In reality, teachers should attend to the ethics of grading for one vitally important reason: Grading occurs so frequently. Whereas most teachers do not engage in sexual relationships with their students (hopefully), in comparison, they do engage in grading-related activities frequently. Thus, when examined from a “frequency” point of view, even a seemingly minor action can have potentially far-reaching consequences. For example, adding one point on one exam in one class for one student may not seem like a big deal. Similarly, giving a particularly hard-working student the benefit of the doubt when deciding on a borderline grade at the end of the semester may seem like a reasonable course of action. But these actions, when multiplied across several teachers, several exams, and several classes, might be the difference between one student getting into graduate school and another receiving a disheartening series of rejection letters. Thus, the opportunity for grading-related ethical dilemmas is why teachers need to consider grading more than they currently might.

the ethics of grAding: An exAMple to considerHopefully, by this point, I’ve convinced you at least that teachers need to keep in mind the ethics of grading as they go about their teaching-related duties. To illustrate how the Ethics Code can provide guidance to teachers engaging in grading-related activities, consider the following example (adapted from Saville, 2012):

Julie and Allen are students in your advanced social psychology course. You’ve had both of them in a previous class, and Julie has been a member of your research team for the past two semesters. Whereas Julie works very hard to achieve good grades, things seem to come a little easier for Allen, who has openly bragged that he rarely studies for exams and yet still ends up getting good grades in most of his classes. Julie, who has attended every class this semester and has once again shown her usual impressive work ethic, is planning on attending graduate school. Allen, on the other hand, isn’t sure what he wants to do after graduation (although he has said it probably won’t include graduate school and may not even include psychology) and doesn’t seem overly motivated to decide any time soon. Moreover, he has missed several of your classes this semester, and, when he was present, rarely participated in class discussions. As you are calculating the final course grades, you realize that both Julie and Allen are two points away from an A.

So here’s the question: Is it ethical to give Julie (but not Allen) two additional points for her hard work during class?

8 bAcK to contents

continued from page 7

Presumably, many teachers (including me) have encountered a situation like this before. On the surface, the decision might seem pretty straightforward: Give Julie the points—you want to reward her hard work, and the higher grade will likely benefit her when it comes time for her to apply to graduate school. Allen, on the other hand, probably doesn’t deserve the extra points: Why reward him for putting in less-than-optimal effort in your class? Moreover, because he isn’t planning on attending graduate school, it’s unlikely that a slightly lower grade will have a big impact on his future. It seems like it’s an open-and-shut case, right? In fact, when considered in light of the Ethics Code, the decision is not so straightforward.

There are three principles that seem especially relevant for cases like this one. First, Principle A (Beneficence and Nonmaleficence) suggests that, “Psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm” (APA, 2010, p. 3). In this case, giving Julie two extra points would likely benefit her when she applies to graduate school. Moreover, because Allen likely won’t be applying to graduate school (and may not even pursue a career in psychology), not giving him the extra points seems as if it won’t do him any long-term harm. Principle D ( Justice), however, suggests that individuals need to be treated fairly. Thus, one could argue that giving points to Julie but not Allen is unfair, regardless of how they acted in class or how much you may like each one personally. They received the same grade in class, and following the principle of justice means you need to treat each one the same way. Finally, Principle E (Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity) states that, “Psychologists respect the dignity and worth of all people and the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, and self-determination” (APA, 2010, p. 4). According to this principle, people have the right to make their own decisions (self-determination). If Allen decided to skip class and not participate in class discussions, it was his choice—even if you dislike his lazy attitude. Or maybe he had legitimate reasons for not participating: Maybe Allen didn’t take part because he has debilitating social anxiety and was embarrassed to tell you about it (an issue that concerns his right to privacy). Either way, Principle D says Allen should not be punished for making these decisions.

Ultimately, deciding which course of action to take in seemingly minor situations like this can be difficult, largely because there is often not a single “correct” solution (as compared to, for example, sleeping with a student, the guidelines for which are very straightforward). In fact, if I were to query 10 different teachers about a particular grading-related dilemma, I might get 10 slightly different decisions, each preceded by a relatively complex and nuanced decision-making process. As I have written elsewhere, “the complexity of ethical dilemmas may be one . . . reason why educators have spent so little time discussing the ethics of teaching” (Saville, 2012, p. 36). Nevertheless, the fact that

grading-related ethical dilemmas are so often ambiguous and complex is precisely the reason why teachers need to make sure they keep the ethics of grading and the Ethics Code in the forefront of their minds.

conclusionIn the grand scheme of things, grading (and other grad-ing-related activities—see Saville, 2012, for more detail) seems like a rather innocuous activity when it comes to its ethicality. In reality, though, grading has the potential to pro-duce complex ethical dilemmas. Given that grading typically occurs many times during the course of a regular school year, it is of considerable ethical concern simply because of the frequency with which ethical dilemmas can arise. For this reason, teachers need to consider the ethics of grading and be very aware of how they approach their grading-related activi-ties. ptn

referencesAmerican Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychol-

ogists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx.

Barrett, D. E., Headley, K. N., Stovall, B., & Witte, J. C. (2006). Teachers’ perceptions of the frequency and seriousness of violations of ethical standards. The Journal of Psychology, 140, 421-433.

Saville, B. K. (2012). The ethics of grading. In R. E. Landrum & M. A. McCarthy (Eds.), Teaching ethically: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 31-42). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Saville, B. K. (2013). Grading as assessment of teaching and learning: Is-sues and opportunities. In D. S. Dunn, S. C. Baker, C. M. Mehrotra, R. E. Landrum, & J. H. Wilson (Eds.), Assessing teaching and learning in psychology: Current and future perspectives (pp. 44-56). Belmont, CA: Cengage.

Tabachnick, B. G., Keith-Spiegel, P., & Pope, K. S. (1991). Ethics of teaching: Beliefs and behaviors of psychologists as educators. Ameri-can Psychologist, 46, 506-515.

Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (2010). Effective grading: A tool for learn-ing and assessment in college (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bryan K. saville is an associate professor in the Department of Psychology at James Madison University ( JMU) in Harrisonburg, VA. He has received numerous awards for his teaching, including James Madison University’s Distinguished Teacher Award and the McKeachie Early Career Award from the Society for the Teaching of Psychology (Division 2 of APA). Dr. Saville is also a Fellow of the American Psychological Association (Division 2). His primary research interests are in evidence-based teaching methods and the psychology of passion (e.g., passion for activities).

bryAn K. sAville

9 bAcK to contents

each day, parents around the world are confronted with a choice that could have long-term effects on the health of their children. The choice to have a child

vaccinated is one that can weigh heavily on a parent’s mind. On one hand, the medical community, supported by public policy, argues for the overwhelming value of vaccines in protecting against dangerous infectious diseases. Howev-er, a parent may question the safety of vaccines because of popular reports suggesting they can cause disorders such as autism. How can anyone determine where the truth lies in such important questions of health and science?

WhAt is AutisM?Autism, or autism spectrum disorder (ASD), involves mild to severe deficiencies in social communication (e.g., failure to make direct eye contact) and restricted interests/repetitive behaviors beginning in early childhood (American Psychi-atric Association DSM-V], 2013. In recent years, the prev-alence of autism has increased; current estimates report that around 1 in 88 children born in the U.S. are diagnosed with the disorder (Glicksman, 2012). Because ASD dramatically impacts the lives of family members and affected individuals, researchers and the general public are searching to under-stand the causes.

reseArch into the cAuses of AutisMIn the 1970s, studies of twins first highlighted the high degree of heritability of autism; this was followed by research suggesting that both genetics and environment play a caus-ative role (Nature Editorial, 2011). However, in 1998, an article was published in The Lancet, a respected medical jour-nal, claiming that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine was linked to the development of autism (Wakefield et al., 1998). This was a case series of 12 children who were referred to the Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology at the Royal Free Hospital in London. (Gastroenterologists treat disorders of the digestive system.) All of the children presented with intestinal symptoms such as diarrhea, but most of them also presented with autism or autistic-like behaviors. The study stated that parents and doctors of eight of these children reported that the onset of autistic behaviors occurred shortly after vaccination with the MMR vaccine. It was suggested that the MMR vaccine triggered autism and intestinal inflammation in these patients. The authors acknowledged that although they described a correlation between MMR and autism, they did not provide evidence of causation. They further stated they were conducting addi-tional viral studies to “help resolve this issue” (Wakefield et al., 1998).

In 2002, the results of these viral studies were published (Uhlmann et al., 2002). The authors claimed to have detect-ed the measles virus and abnormal immune system activation

continued on page 10

does the MMr vAccine cAuse AutisM? Assessing the science

the proposed linK betWeen the MMr vAccine And AutisM does not hold up to scientific evidence.

JessiCa haBashi, PhD utah state university Brigham City regional Campus *

thaYne sWeeten, PhD utah state university Brigham City regional Campus*

Kristin h. WhitloCK, MeD Viewmont high school, Bountiful, ut

* These authors contributed equally to this work.

10 bAcK to contents

in the intestines of 75 of 91 children with autism, indicating a persistent measles infection after vaccination. In compar-ison, the virus was detected in only 5 of 70 control patients who did not have autism. The method used to detect the virus, real-time quantitative PCR, is a highly sensitive tech-nique for finding small molecules in solution.

The following year, additional research was published that supported the MMR vaccine–autism link (Singh and Jensen, 2003). In this study, children with and without autism who had been vaccinated with the MMR vaccine were examined for activation of their immune system against the measles virus. Specifically, researchers attempted to identify whether the blood of the children contained measles virus-fighting proteins called antibodies. The MMR vaccine contains a weakened version of the measles virus; following vaccination, the body produces anti-measles virus antibodies, which will protect against illness should the vaccinated person be ex-posed to the full-strength version (Tortora, Funke, & Case, 2013). The researchers reported that the patients with au-tism responded differently to the MMR vaccine by produc-ing higher levels of measles virus-specific antibodies in their blood than the controls. This evidence of increased immune activation against the measles virus in autistic children added support to the claim that the MMR vaccine was involved in causing autism.

The Lancet article implicating the MMR vaccine as a trigger for autism pitted two weighted concerns in children’s health against each other: in one corner, autism, a devastating neurodevelopmental disease with a rapidly increasing preva-lence; in the other, the MMR vaccine, which has drastically reduced death and disease among children in many areas of the world.

the public responseThe public response to these studies and subsequent media coverage were profound. The MMR vaccination rate in the U.K., which uses the same MMR vaccine as in the U.S., fell from 92% in 1995 to 80% in 2003/2004 (Bustin, 2008). This is significant because it compromised a central goal of vac-cination programs: herd immunity. In herd immunity, when 95% or more of a population is protected from a particular disease through vaccination, unvaccinated individuals will still enjoy a certain amount of protection because the like-lihood that they’ll encounter the disease-causing agent is decreased (Bustin, 2008). The consequence of this change in vaccination rates in the U.K. had headline-making conse-quences: In 2006, an unvaccinated 13-year-old boy became the first person to die of measles in that country in 14 years (Walters, 2009). In the U.S., the rate of vaccination did not show the same nationwide drop; however, resistance to the MMR vaccine cropped up on a smaller scale around the country, and this carried its own set of consequences: Com-pared to an average of 63 measles cases in the U.S. per year between 2000 and 2007, 131 cases were reported in 2008 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2008).

science sAys . . .Although some researchers and members of the general public accepted the MMR vaccine–autism link as truth, inspection of the published data and failure to replicate the results caused scientists to view their findings with skepti-cism (British Medical Journal [BMJ] Editorial, 2011).

dissecting WAKefieldWhat about the original research in The Lancet that started this controversy? Soon after it was published in 1998, critics faulted the work for its small sample size, lack of controls and reliance on parental recall (BMJ Editorial, 2011). Addi-tionally, in the decade following Wakefield’s 1998 publica-tion, multiple studies were published that showed no link be-tween the MMR vaccine and the incidence of autism (BMJ Editorial, 2011). Further, in 2004, exhaustive work by British journalist Brian Deer revealed that Wakefield’s study was not just poorly designed but also suffered from apparently willful deception: He had misreported the children’s medical records, and he had misrepresented his own financial interest in the results of the study (Deer, 2011a).

Much of the critical information in Wakefield’s 1998 article is now known to have been falsified (Deer, 2011a), includ-ing: (a) Of nine children reported to have regressive autism, three had not been diagnosed with autism at all; (b) although all 12 children in the report were described as “previously normal,” five had documented developmental problems prior to receiving the MMR vaccine; (c) some of the children were reported to have developed autism within days after receiv-ing the MMR vaccine, but medical records indicate that the

continued from page 9

continued on page 11

WhAt is MeAsles?Measles (also known as rubeola) is a disease caused by a virus. It may pass through the air in droplets produced by coughing or sneezing. Symptoms of the disease resemble a common cold; however, a full-body rash and sores in the mouth soon follow. The disease can be dangerous because of the many possible complications, including pneumo-nia (infection of the lungs) and encephalitis (infection of the brain). Since the vaccine was introduced in 1963, the number of cases of measles in the U.S. has dropped, from nearly 500,000 in 1920 to 61 in 2010. Today, mea-sles remains a major disease: 70 million cases are reported around the globe each year. In fact, measles, one of the top 20 causes of death worldwide, claims the lives of 600 children per day (Tortora, Funke, & Case, 2013).

referenceTortora, G. J., Funke, B. R., & Case, C. L. Microbiology: An introduc-

tion (11th ed., pp. 506-507, 603-604). San Francisco: Benjamin Cummings.

11 bAcK to contents

onset was months later; and (d) in nine cases the claims of intestinal inflammation were untrue (Deer, 2011a). Faulty information such as this compromises public trust in science and prevents the general public from making informed deci-sions about their health care.

In addition to these falsifications, serious conflicts of interest and breaches of ethics were uncovered. Prior to enrollment in the study, at least five of the children were working with an attorney, Richard Barr, who was building a case against the makers of the MMR vaccine, claiming that the vac-cine had caused their autism (Begley, 2009; Deer, 2011b). Moreover, Wakefield himself had been on the payroll of that attorney for 2 years prior to publication of the 1998 article. Wakefield reportedly received £435,643 (about $650,000) plus expenses (Deer, 20011a). Further, in 1997, a patent had been initiated by Wakefield for a “safer” measles vaccine (Deer, 2011b). Finally, Wakefield was cited by the General Medical Council in Britain for subjecting 11 children to in-trusive procedures (spinal taps and colonoscopies) that were medically unnecessary and for which he had not received ethical approval (Harris, 2010). The council, which regulates and registers doctors wishing to practice medicine in the U.K., revoked Wakefield’s license in 2010 charging that he was guilty of “multiple separate instances of serious profes-sional misconduct” (Meikle and Boseley, 2010).

Notably, Wakefield’s coauthors on the 1998 paper disavowed knowledge of his employment by Barr. Also, Wakefield did not report the conflict of interest to The Lancet upon sub-mission of his article, even though this is expressly required. This prompted Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, to write in 2004 “had we appreciated the full context in which the work reported in the 1998 Lancet paper by Wakefield and colleagues was done, publication would not have taken place in the way that it did” (Horton, 2004).

Ultimately, 10 of the 13 authors of the 1998 Lancet paper issued a “retraction of an interpretation” (Murch et al., 2004), but Wakefield was not one of them. In 2010, the editors of The Lancet retracted the entire publication (The Lancet Editorial, 2010). A retraction is a rare event in science, when a publication is found to be so flawed or inaccurate that it is “taken back” as if it never should have been published in the first place.

WhAt About the other studies?Since 1998, more than 20 studies involving thousands of children from multiple countries have been published, and none of them has found a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism (DeStefano, 2007; Allen and Ivers, 2010). Among these, multiple studies have sought to rep-

licate the findings of Uhlmann et al. (2002) without suc-cess (Afzal et al., 2006; D’Souza et al., 2007; Hornig et al., 2008). In fact, a careful review of the data by British scientist Stephen Bustin revealed that the group had technical errors in how they were using the advanced technology (real-time quantitative PCR) that detects the virus (Bustin, 2008). This advanced molecular technique is very sensitive and is subject to falsely detecting viruses in samples due to a phenomenon called contamination. Contamination occurs when viruses found in the laboratory or in other samples find their way into previously uninfected samples. In essence, the samples from the autistic children were picking up the virus and get-ting “infected” in the laboratory.

The work of Singh and Jensen (2003) has also received care-ful scrutiny, and some basic flaws in the research design have been uncovered. Specifically, the blood samples from normal and autistic children that were tested for antibodies against the measles virus were not properly age-matched; in fact, the ages of the study participants were not even reported in the original publication. This is a critical issue because measles antibody levels decrease with age in children. After vacci-nation (minimum age of first dose, 12 months; second dose, typically 4-6 years [Akinsanya-Beysolow et al., 2013]), mea-sles antibody levels in the blood are high, but they decline each subsequent year. Thus, it is essential to compare autistic and control subjects that are very close in age. In response to questions from other researchers, Singh and Jensen disclosed that their autistic subjects were in fact 2 years younger on average than the control subjects (Sweeten and Fujinami, 2004). Thus, the fact that they found higher levels of measles antibodies in the younger autistic children would be expected due to the differences in age. A later attempt to replicate the findings of Singh and Jensen, but controlling for age, found no difference between measles antibody levels in autistic versus control subjects (Libbey et al., 2007).

the consequencesBased on the lack of convincing scientific evidence, the pro-posed link between the MMR vaccine and ASD does not hold up. But what has resulted from these poorly con-structed and allegedly unethical studies? What is the respon-sibility of these researchers to the children who have suffered by not being protected from a deadly illness and the parents

continued from page 10

continued on page 12

Based on the lack of convincing scientific evidence, the proposed link between the MMR vaccine and ASD does not hold up.

12 bAcK to contents

who have made the decision not to vaccinate their children against measles based on bad science? The controversy over the MMR vaccine and autism shows that scientists have the

potential to do harm when they fail to conduct well-designed experiments and to report their findings truthfully. ptn

hoW to use this Article With your clAssThis article can be used as a reading assignment to supple-ment the chapters on research methods, development and abnormal psychology in your course textbook. The following are some ideas for class assignments and activities based on this article.

• Survey your students about their opinions on the pro-posed link between the MMR vaccine and autism before and after reading the article. One way to do this is to use Poll Everywhere. Poll Everywhere is a way to survey a class and display the answers in real time. It is a useful tool for engaging students and generating valuable feed-back. Instructors can pose a question through PowerPoint or on the web. Students can respond via text message using a cell phone, a “tweet” on Twitter or through the Internet on a computer or smartphone. This technology is available free for up to 40 responses per poll from pollev-erywhere.com.

• Write a persuasive essay based on this article using the RAFT writing strategy. In this method, students are instructed to write on a topic by playing a role (the “R” of RAFT). In the case of our article, that role might be of a researcher, a parent, a journalist, a pediatrician or a health department official. Students are also instructed to write to a particular audience (the “A” of RAFT). For our article, this could be other parents, readers of a news-paper or a research journal, a politician or the editor of a newspaper. Students must also select a format (the “F” in RAFT). This could be a pamphlet, a newspaper article, an editorial, letter to the editor or a letter to other parents. Finally, before they actually begin to write, students must define their topic (the “T” in RAFT). For our article, that topic may be reasons for vaccinating children with the MMR vaccine.

• Initiate a small-group discussion using a literacy-based strategy known as “Save the last word for me.” In this method, students are assigned an article to read and instructed to annotate passages they consider to be im-portant or interesting (e.g., underlining or highlighting). For each annotation, students should compose a quick sentence explaining why they selected the annotation for presentation. Students should have about four passages ready for discussion when they come to class.

When they arrive to class, the students are assigned to groups of three or four. One person in the group is then appointed to read the first of the passages he/she high-lighted; however, instead of explaining why he/she chose the passage, he/she simply says “Save the last word for me.” Each of the remaining group members must then make a unique comment about the passage, explaining what it means to them or why they, too, thought it in-teresting. Only when everyone else has had a turn can the person who initially read the passage give his/her thoughts on it. At this point, a second group member is appointed to read one of the passages he/she highlighted, ending the recitation with “Save the last word for me.” And so the procedure is repeated until everyone has spo-ken, and all of the students’ passages have been explored.

• Have students work in small groups (3-5 students) to write a summary of the key ideas of this article using the GIST method. After distributing a copy of the article to each group, they should read the first paragraph and summarize it in 25 words or fewer. They should then read the second paragraph and rewrite their first summary to incorporate the new information (the second summary should not exceed 25 words). This procedure should be repeated for each subsequent paragraph until the group has produced a 25-word summary of the complete article. Have each group read their summary to the rest of the class.

• Lead a class discussion of the article, emphasizing the terms that are relevant to research methods, including: causation, correlation, ethics, replication and sample size.

• In discussing this article with your class, present fol-low-up information on Andrew Wakefield, the lead author of the 1998 article from The Lancet.

— Wakefield loses his British medical license: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/may/24/mmr-doctor-andrew-wakefield-struck-off

— Wakefield receives “Golden Duck” award for life-time achievement in scientific quackery from the Good Thinking Society, a group created by author Simon Singh: http://www.guardian.co.uk/soci-ety/2012/dec/23/struck-off-mmr-doctor-quackery-award

— Wakefield sues the editor-in-chief of the British Medical Journal, claiming that the journal made “false and . . . defamatory allegations” about his work: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jan/05/andrew-wakefield-sues-bmj-mmr

continued from page 11

continued on page 13

13 bAcK to contents

referencesAfzal, M. A., Ozoemena, L. C., O’Hare, A., Kidger, K. A., Bentley, M.

L., Minor, P. D. (2006). Absence of detectable measles virus genome sequence in blood of autistic children who have had their MMR vaccination during the routine childhood immunization schedule of UK. Journal of Medical Virology, 78(5), 623-630.

Akinsanya-Beysolow, I., Jenkins, R., & Meissner, H. C.; Immunization Services Division, National Center for Immunization and Respira-tory Diseases, CDC. (2013). Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended immunization schedule for persons aged 0 through 18 years–United States, 2013. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 62 (Suppl. 1), 2-8.

Allan, G. M., & Ivers, H. (2010). The autism-vaccine story: Fiction and deception? Canadian Family Physician, 56, 1013.

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical man-ual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Begley, S. (2009). Anatomy of a scare. Newsweek, 153(9), 42-47.Bustin, S. A. (2008). RT-qPCR and molecular diagnostics: No evidence

for measles virus in the GI tract of autistic children. European Phar-maceutical Review Digital, 1(11), 17.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2008). Update: Measles—United States, January-July 2008. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 57(33), 893-896.

D’Souza, Y., Dionne, S., Seidman, E. G., Bitton, A., Ward, B. J. (2007). No evidence of persisting measles virus in the intestinal tissues of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Gut, 56(6), 886-888.

Deer, B. (2011a). Secrets of the MMR scare: How the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed. British Medical Journal, 342, c5347.

Deer, B. (2011b). Secrets of the MMR scare: How the vaccine crisis was meant to make money. British Medical Journal, 342, c5258.

DeStefano, F. (2007). Vaccines and autism: Evidence does not support a causal association. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 82(6), 756-759.

Editorial: Retraction—Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. [Editorial]. (2010). The Lancet, 375, 445.

Editorial: Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent. [Editorial]. (2011). British Medical Journal, 342, c7452.

Editorial: The mind’s tangled web. [Editorial]. (2011). Nature, 479(7371), 5.

Glicksman, E. (2012). Catching autism earlier. APA Monitor on Psycholo-gy, 43(9), 57-60.

Harris, G. (2010, February 3). Journal retracts 1998 paper linking autism to vaccines. The New York Times, p. A9.

Hornig, M., Briese, T., Buie T., Bauman, M. L., Lauwers, G., Siemetzki, U., Hummel, K., Rota, P. A., Bellini, W. J., O’Leary, J. J., Sheils, O., Alden, E., Pickering, L., Lipkin, W. I. (2008). Lack of association between measles virus vaccine and autism with enteropathy: A case-control study. PLoS ONE, 3(9), e3140.

Horton, R. (2004). The lessons of MMR. The Lancet, 363(9411), 747-749.

Libbey, J. E., Coon, H. H., Kirkman, N. J., Sweeten, T. L., Miller, J. N., Lainhart, J. E., McMahon, W. M., & Fujinami, R. S. (2007). Are there altered antibody responses to measles, mumps, or rubella virus-es in autism? Journal of Neurovirology, 13, 252-259.

Meikle J., & Boseley, S. (2010, May 24). MMR row doctor Andrew Wakefield struck off register. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/may/24/mmr-doctor-andrew-wakefield-struck-off

continued on page 14

continued from page 12

JessicA hAbAshi

thAyne sWeeten

Kristin h. WhitlocK

About the AuthorsJessica habashi, PhD, is a biology lecturer at Utah State Universi-ty’s Brigham City Regional Campus. She teaches courses in human physiology, elementary microbiology, and biology and the citizen. She received her PhD from Yale University.

Kristin h. Whitlock, Med, teaches Advanced Placement (AP) psy-chology and sports psychology at Viewmont High School in Boun-tiful, Utah. She currently serves as the AP Psychology College Board advisor, is a member of the Test Development Committee, and is a question leader at the annual AP psychology readings. She has served as chair of the APA High School Psychology Standards Working Group and as member-at-large for the Teachers of Psychology in Secondary Schools (TOPSS). Mrs. Whitlock was the recipient of the Moffett Memorial Teaching Award, a Presidential Citation from the APA and the TOPSS Excellence in Teaching Award.

thayne sweeten, PhD, earned a PhD in Medical Neurobiology at Indiana University–Purdue University at Indianapolis. He has worked at the University of Utah and Utah State University, where he has published about 20 research articles and book chapters on the etiology of autism and related disorders with a focus on neuro-immune mechanisms. This research includes investigations into the purported vaccines and autism connection. Dr. Sweeten is a Nation-al Academies Education Fellow in the Life Sciences. As an active member of the Society for College Science Teachers and the Nation-al Science Teachers Association, he currently publishes and presents pedagogical research. Dr. Sweeten teaches various biology courses at Utah State University–Brigham City.

14 bAcK to contents

Murch, S. H., Anthony, A., Casson, D. H., Malik, M., Berelowitz, M., Dhillon, A. P., Thomson, M. A., Valentine, A., Davies, S. E., & Walker-Smith, J. A. (2004). Retraction of an interpretation. The Lancet 363, 750.

Singh, V. K., & Jensen, R. L. (2003). Elevated levels of measles antibodies in children with autism. Pediatric Neurology, 28, 292-294.

Sweeten, T. L., & Fujinami, R. S. (2004). A potential link between measles virus and autism: Age-matched control groups are essential [letter]. Pediatric Neurology, 30, 78; author reply, 78.

Tortora, G. J., Funke, B. R., & Case, C. L. (2012). Microbiology: An in-troduction (11th ed., pp. 506-507, 603-604). San Francisco: Benja-min Cummings.

Uhlmann, V., Martin, C. M., Sheils, O., Pilkington, L., Silva, I., Killalea, A., Murch, S. B., Walker-Smith, J., Thomson, M., Wakefield, A. J., & O’Leary, J. J. (2002). Potential viral pathogenic mechanism for new variant inflammatory bowel disease. Molecular Pathology, 55(2), 84-90.

Wakefield, A. J., Murch, S. H., Anthony, A., Linnell, J., Casson, D. M., Malik, M., Berelowitz, M., Dhillon, A. P., Thomson, M. A., Harvey, P., Valentine, A., Davies, S. E., & Walker-Smith, J. A. (1998). Ile-al-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet, 351(9103), 637-641.

Walters, J. (2009, February 9). MMR vaccine: “No jab, no school.” The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/educa-tion/2009/feb/10/measles-mmr-vaccine

continued from page 13

Apf high school psychology teAcher netWorK grAnts

To support the development of local and regional networks of psychology teachers, the American Psychological Foun-dation (APF) and the APA Education Directorate invite proposals to support a local or regional teaching workshop or conference for high school psychology teachers. APF is particularly interested in proposals for professional devel-opment opportunities for teachers that could lead to the formation of a new regional network of psychology teachers. Previous awardees may apply for a second year of funding to continue support of a local network. APF will award $2,500 in grants in 2014. These grants are made possible through a generous gift from Dr. Lee Gurel.

Send proposals by May 1, 2014, to Emily Leary Chesnes, American Psychological Association, 750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242 or by email to eleary@apa.org. Proposals should include justification/rationale for how a specific project would build a new network of psychology teachers and enhance the teaching of high school psychology locally and a budget outlining the expected costs associated with the network, workshop or conference.

other neWsApA boArd of educAtionAl AffAirs offers grAnts for 2014 teAching conferences

The APA Board of Educational Affairs will award $10,000 in grants to support conferences on enhancing the quality of undergraduate education in psychology and advancing the teaching of psychology at the secondary, 2-year, or 4-year level. To qualify for funding, conferences must be directed by an APA member, associate, or affiliate and meet the crite-ria stated on the web at: http://www.apa.org/about/awards/block-ugradpre.aspx.

Grant recipients may use the funds to offset travel expens-es of selected conference participants, registration fees of conference participants, and speaker fees. Applicants may qualify for up to $1,000 during a given year. Applications for new and annual meetings are encouraged. Complete details about the application components are on the APA website at http://www.apa.org/about/awards/block-ugradpre.aspx.

Funding requests must be postmarked by January 27, 2014. Send requests to Martha Boenau of the Education Director-ate at the APA address or by email to MBoenau@apa.org.

other neWs

15 bAcK to contents

psychology And the college, cAreer, And civic life (c3) frAMeWorK

ApA helps introduce the sociAl And behAviorAl sciences in the c3 frAMeWorK

eMilY learY Chesnes, MBa american Psychological association education Directorate

in September 2013, the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) published The College, Career, and Civil Life Framework for Social Studies State Standards: State

guidance for enhancing the rigor of K-12 civics, economics, geography and history (NCSS, 2013) (“C3 Framework”). The C3 Framework provides states with recommendations to be used to revise their state social studies standards and will be used to assess student learning for years to come. The doc-ument is available through http://www.socialstudies.org/c3 and includes an appendix on psychology skills and concepts.

Psychology and the other behavioral and social sciences (e.g., sociology and anthropology) were missing from the original draft of the document, which focused on civics, economics, geography, and history as the four key social studies dis-ciplines. Two important goals of APA are to promote the National Standards for High School Psychology Curricula (APA, 2011) and to increase recognition of psychology as a sci-ence, per APA’s new strategic plan, but APA staff and the TOPSS Committee members were aware that being included in the C3 Framework would be strategically advantageous for securing and promoting psychology’s place in the high school curriculum. Starting in late 2012, APA staff began a series of conversations with the C3 Framework leadership team on the role of the behavioral and social sciences and the C3 Framework. APA, along with the American Sociological Association (ASA) and the American Anthropological Asso-ciation (AAA), was invited to participate in a C3 Framework

Advisory Working Group of Behavioral and Social Science Professional Organizations, discussing the C3 Framework and its relevance to these disciplines. In early 2013, APA staff and Board of Educational Affairs member (and past TOPSS chair) Amy Fineburg, PhD, participated in a webinar with the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) Social Studies Assessment, Curriculum, and Instruction (SSACI) collaborative, which represents over 20 states and had ini-tiated the C3 document. During the webinar, staff and Dr. Fineburg were able to share information on APA’s National Standards, Guidelines for Preparing High School Psychology Teachers: Course-Based and Standards-Based Approaches (APA, 2012) and other APA resources for psychology teachers.

In May 2013, APA staff and Jeanne Blakeslee, a past TOPSS chair, were invited to participate in a SSACI meeting to fur-ther discuss the C3 Framework and the behavioral and social sciences. At about the same time, APA, ASA, and AAA were each invited to develop companion documents that would link the behavioral and social sciences to the C3 Framework. An APA working group drafted the Psychology Companion Document for the C3 Framework, which was ultimately in-cluded in the C3 Framework as Appendix B. (Additional appendices on sociology and anthropology were also includ-ed.) Additionally, the C3 Framework leadership team made several edits to the C3 Framework document itself based on feedback from APA and the TOPSS Committee. This re-vised language introduced the social and behavioral sciences

continued on page 16

16 bAcK to contents

in the C3 Framework and added several references to these disciplines throughout the C3 Framework.

Members of the psychology companion document writing team were: Jeanne A. Blakeslee, St. Paul’s School for Girls (MD); Amy C. Fineburg, Oak Mountain High School (AL); Kenneth D. Keith, University of San Diego (CA); Deb-ra E. Park, Rutgers University, Camden (NJ); and Hilary Rosenthal, Glenbrook South High School (IL). Emily Leary Chesnes and Robin Hailstorks from APA were staff liaisons.

The C3 Framework will join the Common Core State Stan-dards for Mathematics and English Language Arts and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) as national guidelines for social studies, math, English language, and science educa-tion. We are pleased the current efforts with the C3 Frame-work resulted in psychology being included in the document. The added appendix on psychology supports APA’s efforts to impress upon states the importance and relevance of psychol-ogy at the high school level. It advances APA’s strategic plan by educating the public about psychology as a science. ptn

referencesAmerican Psychological Association. (2011). National standards for high

school psychology curricula. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/educa-tion/k12/national-standards.aspx

American Psychological Association. (2012). Guidelines for preparing high school psychology teachers: Course-based and standards-based approaches. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/education/k12/teaching-guide-lines.aspx

National Council for the Social Studies. (2013). The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for Enhancing the Rigor of K-12 Civics, Economics, Geography, and His-tory. Silver Spring, MD: Author.

continued from page 15

Apf Announces professionAl developMent AWArds for high school psychology teAchers

the purpose of these awards is to help high school psychol-ogy teachers travel to and attend the 2014 american Psy-chological association annual Convention.

deAdline: April 1, 2014Applicants may be awarded up to $500 to attend the annual APA Convention, being held in Washington, DC, August 7-10, 2014. Funds can be used to offset costs of travel, con-ference registration, and housing accommodations. Appli-cants must provide a budget for conference costs. In total, $2,500 is available for funding. These grants are made possi-ble through a generous gift from Dr. Lee Gurel.

For more information about eligibility and how to apply, visit the American Psychological Foundation (APF) website at http://www.apa.org/apf/funding/professional-topss.aspx. Information on the APA Convention is available online at http://www.apa.org/convention.

other neWs

The C3 Framework will join the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and English Language Arts and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) as national guidelines for social studies, math, English language, and science education.

17 bAcK to contents

APA and TOPSS have given high school teaching awards since 2000. Each year, the number of qualified and competitive applicants nominated by students,

parents, or peers grows. There were eight nominees this year, each with outstanding credentials. The 2013 honor-ees of this prestigious award stand out for their innovative approaches in the teaching of psychological science. They expect students to perform and think critically. Their in-sights and enthusiasm for psychology extend beyond the classroom walls.

KAthleen gAvurAKathleen Gavura has joyfully taught for 27 years. In addition to her role as a secondary school teacher, Gavura has served as an AP Psychology Reader and as an adjunct faculty member of a local community college. When asked to summarize her career in six words, she said “I’m happily too loquacious for six words!” With a BS in psychology from the University of Pittsburgh and a master’s in educational psychology from Rutgers University, Gavura’s commitment to the discipline and her students has been anything but brief.

Gavura teaches for the Woodbridge Township School District in suburban New Jersey. Of the 1,400 students in Colonia High School, close to half the population is ethnically diverse. To celebrate the uniqueness of each individual, Gavura’s students created and aired commercials promoting New Jersey’s anti-bullying legislation. Gavura is proud of the

collaborative atmosphere students have maintained amidst such varying backgrounds. Colonia High School students, for example, have taken the opportunity to get to know others by “mixing it up” at lunch. The “community feeling” is also evident in the psychology fair Gavura organizes with her students each year.

In the psychology fair, students embrace the scientific process by researching, designing, and performing their own experiments. Students begin by writing an APA-style literature review of applicable published research. Next, they conduct peer reviews so students can analyze design templates for confounding variables. Gavura says, even “[s]tudents who previously had difficulty or thought they did not like science, blossom.”

MiKe hAMiltonFor the past 12 years, Hamilton has taught psychology, which he believes is “the most … incredibly rewarding … [and] relevant class students can take in high school.” Hamilton received both his BA and MA from the University of Northern Iowa in social studies education and history,

ApA topss excellence in teAching AWArds: introducing the 2013 Winners

Maria Vita Penn Manor high school

neWs froM topss

continued on page 18

KAthleen gAvurA MiKe hAMilton nAncy fenton

Gavura says, even “[s]tudents who previously had difficulty or thought they did not like science, blossom.”

18 bAcK to contents

respectively. After 4 years of teaching in Iowa, Hamilton moved to Massachusetts and began working at Hopkinton High School in 2006. This suburban school west of Boston has a population of 1,100, and 90% of students take a psychology course. Hamilton would love to see secondary students across the nation have this type of access to the scientific study of mind and behavior; he supports the idea of psychology as a required graduation credit.

Hamilton is a proponent of psychology on many professional levels. In his classroom, he engages students in demonstrations and activities that deepen conceptual understanding. In one assignment, Hamilton’s students read authentic case studies of mental illnesses adapted from the DSM-IV casebook. Students are then assessed on their ability to identify the diagnoses correctly and substantiate a treatment plan using the biopsychosocial approach. Students, colleagues, and administrators praise Hamilton for his challenging pedagogy, and they also note his exceptional ability to connect and empathize with others.

Hamilton’s leadership and interpersonal skills are evident outside of the classroom. He has presented at various regional College Board AP workshops and at national workshops, including the 2010 APA/Clark University Workshop for High School Teachers. From 2010-2012, Hamilton served as a member-at-large on the Committee of Teachers of Psychology in Secondary Schools (TOPSS). In addition to coauthoring the third edition of AP Psychology, a review book by D&S Marketing, Hamilton also initiated a local, grassroots collective of New England Teachers of Psychology (NETOP). Whether he is teaching, leading professional development, or grading AP tests as a Table Leader, Hamilton encourages students and teachers alike and is a contributor to the growth of psychology nationwide.

nAncy fentonFenton teaches at Adlai E. Stevenson High School—a large, public suburban high school with about 3,800 students in Illinois. Stevenson offers one of the largest AP programs in the nation, with up to 14 sections of AP Psychology alone! Fenton’s colleagues and administration view her as an essential part of a tenacious team. Her division director, Brad Smith, said Fenton’s “experiments … readings, and dynamic

interactive presentations … [are] famous around [Stevenson] … and the country.”

Although she has been teaching for 14 years, Fenton’s first experience instructing psychology began in 2003 at another northern suburban school in Chicago—Antioch Community High School. In addition to pioneering the AP program and psychology club at Antioch, Fenton became actively involved in Teachers of Psychology in Secondary Schools (TOPSS), where she had “the opportunity to work with some of the most talented and passionate educators in high school and college psychology.”

What Fenton gained from her membership she has returned ten-fold. From 2008 to 2010, Fenton served as a member-at-large on the TOPSS Committee. She has collaborated on many projects, including: the creation and revision of several APA/TOPSS unit lesson plans (e.g., Biological Bases of Psychology and Perspectives in Psychological Science), the creation of performance indicators to accompany the National Standards for the Teaching of High School Psychology, and the TOPSS resource manual for new teachers of psychology. Presently, Fenton represents TOPSS as a member of the APA Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education (CPSE). She has coauthored many publications, including Research and Education Association’s All Access review guide, and is currently editing the second edition of Myers’ Psychology for AP.

Fenton, who thrives on new challenges, earned her BA in history and secondary education from Northeastern Illinois University and her MA in psychology from National Louis University. For her students, she maintains high standards with rigorous assessments. In one assignment, she uses excerpts from the APA Monitor on Psychology to get her students to differentiate various types of research methods. Fenton views each task she undertakes as an integral part of her own growth; however, it is easy to see her influence in classrooms throughout the nation. ptn

continued from page 17

Students, colleagues, and administra-tors praise Hamilton for his challenging pedagogy, and they also note his excep-tional ability to connect and empathize with others.

Fenton’s “experiments … readings, and dynamic interactive presentations … [are] famous around [Stevenson] … and the country.”

19 bAcK to contents

imagine you’ve been asked to teach a class in which you are expected to be the spokesperson for your entire disci-pline and to expertly convey topics far outside your area

of specialization that you haven’t thought about in years, maybe decades. Your success is critical. This class will be the first, and for many the only, course students will take in your field. Your department depends on having a hefty enroll-ment in your course to fuel the major and keep its programs strong. This means you will be teaching hundreds, maybe even thousands, of students.

This is the challenge faced by those who teach Introducto-ry Psychology. Although the challenge is a daunting one, it is partnered within an incredible opportunity. Introductory Psychology offers a chance to impart our field’s most pow-erful lessons. The course inspires amazement at the biolog-ical mechanisms that give rise to the mind. It explores how we perceive, remember and learn; and how our subjective perspective on the world affects our behavior and even our physical health. It teaches us about the parts of ourselves that are durable as well as the parts that shift with age and social context. It makes us more aware of the diversity of the human experience and the complexity of mental illness. Introductory Psychology teaches us how to influence others for positive change.

Given the significance of Introductory Psychology, Stanford University initiated a conference in 2012 devoted exclusively

to teaching this course. The first Stanford Psychology One Conference was organized to celebrate the 10th anniversary of Stanford’s Psychology One Program, a program devoted to the teaching of introductory psychology. Due to its pos-itive reception, the conference has since become an annual tradition, supported in part by grants from the APS Teaching Fund and the APA Board of Educational Affairs.

The Third Annual Stanford Psychology One Conference will take place on July 10-11, 2014, on Stanford’s campus. Stan-ford will host instructors from around the country and Can-ada representing liberal arts institutions, Research I universi-ties, local community colleges and high schools.

Attendance will be limited to 75 participants. The confer-ence’s intimate size allows it to be focused. Participants get to know each other in advance by collaborating on a conference “Wiki.” In a day-and-a-half schedule, attendees share ideas both formally and informally. An especially popular feature of the conference is its collections of brief demonstrations of techniques used in attendees’ courses. These demonstrations range from specific content used in lecture, to new technology

hArnessing the potentiAl of introductory psychology: the stAnford psychology one conference

BriDgette Martin harD, PhD

stanford university

continued on page 20

The Third Annual Stanford Psychology One Conference will take place on July 10-11, 2014, on Stanford’s campus.

20 bAcK to contents

Conference presenter Danny oppenheimer (uCla) showed attendees how to bring developmental psychology to life by incorporating children into classroom demonstrations.

Keynote speaker regan gurung (university of Wisconsin, green Bay) challenged everyone to teach like a “superhero.”

tools that make it easy to share current psychology news with students, to creative methods for assessing student learning.

The conference also features presentations by teaching ex-perts. Previous presenters included Charles Brewer, Philip Zimbardo, Neil Lutsky, Regan Gurung, and David Daniel. Attendees also take part in several discussion-based sessions. Previously, attendees have tackled controversial topics such as the pressure to take classrooms online and whether Introduc-tory Psychology classes should all share common “core” con-tent. Attendees also grappled with the more mundane topics such as the challenges of wrangling extremely large classes.

Thanks to financial support from Stanford and the APS Teaching Fund, registration for the conference is only $75 ($50 for early birds who register by December 31). Registra-tion includes food and materials for the conference duration. Registration is limited to 75 participants to ensure the inti-mate atmosphere of this program.

For more details and to register, visit our conference webpage: http://psych-one-conference.stanford.edu/ ptn

continued from page 19

Bridgette Martin hard is the coordinator of the Psychology One Program. She received her BS in psychology from Furman University and her PhD in cognitive psychology from Stanford. She also com-pleted a postdoctoral fellowship in developmental psychology at the University of Oregon as the recipient of a National Research Service Award. Hard’s research focuses on how infants and adults make sense of observed actions. As Psychology One coordinator, she promotes effective teaching and learning at all levels. She helps the faculty de-velop course content and materials and recruits and mentors teaching assistants. Hard also works directly with Psychology One students through guest lectures and one-on-one guidance. She also teaches courses at Stanford in comparative and developmental psychology and fitness classes through Stanford’s Health Improvement Program.

bridgette MArtin hArd

21 bAcK to contents

o liver Sacks has created another fascinating book that discusses a realm of human nature (the love of music and musical skill) through his lens as a neurolo-

gist. For example, Sacks speaks with curiosity and respect about individuals with Williams syndrome, which involves severe developmental disabilities accompanied by a great sociability and a proclivity for music. (Great musical talent is sometimes present, but not always.) He describes indi-viduals with dementia, with seizures, and with aphasia and how these conditions relate to musical skill or interest. He discusses absolute pitch (otherwise known as perfect pitch) and rhythm deafness, which sometimes occurs following left-hemisphere strokes.

Musicophilia shares many of the fine attributes of Sacks’ pre-vious books, such as Anthropologist From Mars and The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat. Musicophilia is well written and easy to follow, well within the capabilities of an intro-ductory student. Sacks wears his scholarship lightly and uses an accessible vocabulary. His voice is humane and caring, and he seems to value the various patients who have helped him understand neurological oddities. Indeed, that seems to be his life’s work: examining people with neurological odd-ities to see how the brain works. Yet, he never regards them as just data points, and he is adept at communicating their personalities and dilemmas in a page or two.

Musicophilia is disappointing in some respects, compared to some of his 11 other books. Sacks more or less invented the genre of the serious-but-accessible book on the brain, and the novelty of his achievement has naturally dimmed some-what with time. Individuals who have acquired musical hal-lucinations as a result of deafness or seizures are interesting

but perhaps not quite as gripping as those in Awakenings, the book about patients with sleeping sickness (encephalitic lethargica) who recover upon being prescribed L-dopa. That story was turned into a well-regarded film, just as The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat has been turned into a one-act opera. Musical savants are also intriguing, but Sacks has discussed them in previous works.

Sacks’ personal taste for music and the arts pops up fre-quently in the book and will no doubt be stimulating for readers with similar backgrounds. Nonetheless, how many readers know any opera by Janacek, much less know it so well as to have it run through their mind unbidden for weeks? While Sacks never comes across as elitist, it is clear that that he is part of a cultured society, in the heart of medicine and the humanities. Indeed, one of his greatest achievements is to have attained great success despite doing unconventional, humanistic research, rather than the usual natural science approach.

For my money, Sacks works best in smaller doses, such as the many magazine articles he has written over the years. (Indeed, at least one case in Musicophilia appeared first in the “Neurologist’s Notebook” series the New Yorker pub-lishes occasionally.) Students are unlikely to read this entire book, but assigning a chapter for a reaction paper, or as an extra-credit assignment, would work well in a general psy-chology or biopsychology course. If it’s the latter, an instruc-tor might ask the students to describe two or three cases, then explain the functions of the brain areas mentioned (e.g., basal ganglia), tying it in with other course material. At the end, Sacks’ scholarship and his accessibility are his finest qualities. ptn

booK revieW

MusicophiliA: tAles of Music And the brAin

reviewed by Craig CoWDen, PhD tacoma Community College

author: oliver sacks Publisher: Knopf Copyright year: 2007 isBn: 978-1-4000-3353-9 Pages: 448 Price: $11.83 (paperback)

22 bAcK to contents

neWs froM topss & pt@cc

pt@cc election resultsThe APA Committee of Psychology Teachers at Commu-nity Colleges (PT@CC) is delighted to welcome two new members who will join the committee beginning in 2014. Kris Leppien-Christensen, PhD, of Saddleback College and Helen K. Taylor, PhD, of Bellevue College were elected to the committee in the 2013 PT@CC Committee Officers Election.

The PT@CC Committee extends thanks and appreciation to Craig Cowden, PhD, of Tacoma Community College and Ladonna Lewis, PhD, of Glendale Community College for their service to PT@CC and their commitment to excellence in the teaching of psychology.

Announcing the 2014 pt@cc student presentAtion contestThe PT@CC Student Presentation Contest aims to promote active learning through the creation of electronic presenta-tions (e.g., PowerPoint presentations, posters) by psychology students at community colleges. Students are invited to submit an electronic presentation in the form of a research poster.

Entries must fit one of the following categories:• Presentation illustrates and explains a psychological con-

cept, theory or research discovery.• Presentation illustrates and explains a service learning

experience or other application of psychology in the community.

The presentation also must be accompanied by a four- to five-page APA Style research paper that discusses the psy-chological concept or theory, an application of psychology or research discovery. In addition, all submissions must be accompanied by a contest cover sheet and a faculty sponsor-ship letter. Full details are available on the APA website at http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/undergrad/ptacc/index.aspx. Deadline: March 31, 2014.

The first-place winner will be awarded $500. The sec-ond-place winner will be awarded $300, and the third-place winner will be awarded $200. The three PT@CC winners will have the opportunity to participate in the Psi Beta/PT@CC poster session at the 2014 APA Annual Convention in Washington, DC.

Please contact Martha Boenau (mboenau@apa.org or 1-800-374-2721, ext. 6140) with questions.

pt@cc seeKing noMinAtions for AWArdPT@CC is seeking nominations for the Award for Excellence in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at a Two-Year College or Campus. The award recognizes the important contributions made by psychology faculty at 2-year institutions.

eligibilityIndividuals are invited to nominate others or self-nominate for the award. Nominees must be members of the APA Psychology Teachers at Community Colleges (PT@CC).

AWArdRecipient will receive $1,000, a plaque from APA and a 1-year APA Community College Teacher Affiliate member-ship renewal.

noMinAtion procedure And evAluAtionThe following nomination materials should be submitted: • a nomination letter that provides a detailed description of

the nominee’s demonstrated commitment to excellence in teaching at a 2-year institution;

• three letters of support, including at least one from a stu-dent at the institution; and

• the nominee’s current CV.

Nominees will be evaluated in relation to the excellence of their contribution(s) to the scholarship of teaching and learning at a 2-year institution (e.g., receipt of other teaching awards, student evaluations, professional presenta-tions or publications on teaching or pedagogy, and promoting psychology as a science).

deAdline dAteNomination materials should be sent by March 3, 2014, to:

American Psychological AssociationEducation DirectoratePrecollege and Undergraduate Education (PCUE)750 First Street, NEWashington, DC 20002-4242

continued on page 23

23 bAcK to contents

neWs froM topss & pt@cc

topss coMMittee election resultsThe APA Committee of Teachers of Psychology in Second-ary Schools (TOPSS) is delighted to welcome three new members who will join the committee beginning in 2014. Michael Hamilton of Hopkinton High School (Hopkinton, MA) was elected as chair-elect, Virginia Welle of Chippewa Falls Senior High School (Chippewa Falls, WI) was elected as member-at-large and Amy Johnson Ramponi of Kimber-ly High School (Kimberly, WI) was elected as membership coordinator.

The TOPSS Committee extends sincere thanks and appre-ciation to Jann Longman, Tonya Hinton and Katie Clark for their service to TOPSS and their commitment to excellence in the teaching of psychology. TOPSS also thanks Ken Keith, PhD, for his term as a TOPSS College Faculty Representa-tive. Dr. Keith’s term ends in December 2013, and a new college faculty representative will be announced in early 2014.

ApA topss coMpetition for high school psychology students

The APA Committee of Teachers of Psychology in Second-ary Schools (TOPSS) is pleased to announce the 2014 APA TOPSS Competition for High School Psychology Students, which will be an essay competition. Each of the up to four winners will receive a $250 award. Submissions must be made by april 1, 2014. The 2014 essay topic will focus on obesity, a critical health problem that is increasing worldwide. Students are asked to describe the biopsychosocial factors that contrib-ute to obesity and offer a solution using psychological science. The competition question, directions, rules, and a rubric will be posted to the TOPSS website at http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/topss/index.aspx by early January 2014.

Please contact Emily Leary Chesnes at eleary@apa.org or 202.572.3013 if you have any questions.

2014 ApA topss excellence in teAching AWArds cAll for noMinAtions The purpose of the APA TOPSS Excellence in Teaching Award is to provide an opportunity for TOPSS to recognize outstanding teachers in psychology. There will be up to three annual awards.

Winners will receive a framed certificate, engraved award, cash prize of $500 and a free TOPSS membership or renewal for the 2015 membership year. Additionally, Worth Publish-ers is generously donating a set of their Interactive (Power-Point) Presentation Slides for Introductory Psychology, Volumes 1 and 2 and the Worth Video Anthology Flash Drive for Introduc-tory Psychology to each of the winning teachers.

Details about eligibility and the application procedure can be found on the web at http://www.apa.org/about/awards/teach-ing-excellence.aspx. Deadline: March 1, 2014.

don’t Miss this opportunity in 2014: ApA convention

The American Psychological Association Annual Convention will be held in Washington, DC, on Aug. 7-10, 2014. Visit the APA website for updates throughout the year at www.apa.org/convention.

MArK your cAlendAr

continued from page 22

24 bAcK to contents

MArK your cAlendAr

2014 Meetings of the regionAl psychologicAl AssociAtions

MArch 5-8, 2014Southeastern Psychological Association (SEPA), Nashville, TN http://www.sepaonline.com/

MArch 13-16, 2014Eastern Psychological Association (EPA), Boston, MAhttp://www.easternpsychological.org/

April 3-5, 2014Southwestern Psychological Association (SWPA), San Antonio, TXhttp://www.swpsych.org/

April 24-26, 2014Rocky Mountain Psychological Association (RMPA), Salt Lake City, UThttp://www.rockymountainpsych.org/

April 24-27, 2014Western Psychological Association (WPA), Portland, ORhttp://www.westernpsych.org/

MAy 1-3, 2014Midwestern Psychological Association (MPA), Chicago, ILhttp://www.midwesternpsych.org/

october 17-18, 2014New England Psychological Association (NEPA), Bates College, Lewiston, MEwww.NEPsychological.org

Aps AnnuAl convention feAtured speAKers

MAy 22-25, 2014—sAn frAncisco, cA, usA

http://www.psychologicalscience.org/convention

some of the featured speakers at the 2014 association for Psychological science annual Convention are: Richard C. Atkinson, Mahzarin R. Banaji, Tara S. Behrend, Robert A. Bjork, Scott Brown, Robert Burton, Elizabeth D. (Capaldi) Phillips, Chris Chambers, Serena Chen, Dante Cicchetti, Geoffrey L. Cohen, Lilia M. Cortina, Angélique O.J. Cramer, Michael Cunningham, Pamela E. Davis-Kean, Nelson Dellis, Dominique de Quervain, Zoltan Dienes, Brian M. D’Onofrio, David A. Dunning, Carol S. Dweck, Kafui Dzirasa, Elissa S. Epel, Mark G. Frank, Susan M. Frantz, Jack L. Gallant, Mark A. Gluck, Phillip A. Goff, Kalanit O. Grill-Spector, Brian D. Haig, Diane F. Halpern, Jessica L. Hartnett,

Scott E. Highhouse, Thomas W. James, Michael N. Jones, Ethan F. Kross, Jennifer Kurkoski, R. Eric Landrum, Paul J. Laurienti, Michael D. Lee, Robert W. Levenson, Catherine Lord, Gitta H. Lubke, Richard E. Lucas, Sal Macias, Maureen McCarthy, Ishbel McWha-Hermann, Michael Merzenich, Janet Metcalfe, Rustin D. Meyer, Christopher S. Monk, Frederick J. Morrison, Janaina Mourao-Miranda, Michael C. Neale, Nora S. Newcombe, Brian Nosek, Frederick L. Oswald, Elizabeth A. Phelps, Antonio Rangel, Keith Rayner, Gregg H. Recanzone, Patricia A. Reuter-Lorenz, Aaron S. Richmond, Terry E. Robinson, Henry L. Roediger, III, Daniel L. Schacter, Frank L. Schmidt, Neal Schmitt, John E. Schulenberg, James H. Sidanius, Barbara A. Spellman, Claude M. Steele, Jennifer K. Steeves, Mark Steyvers, Bill Swann, Carol A. Tavris, Moriah E. Thomason, Jessica L. Tracy, Francis Tuerlinckx, Marius Usher, Jeffrey B. Vancouver, Wolf VanPaemel, Kathleen D. Vohs, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers, Tessa V. West, Jelte M. Wicherts, Tal Yarkoni, Angela J. Yu

registrAtionhttp://www.psychologicalscience.org/convention/registration.cfm

nitop JAnuAry 2014: there’s still tiMe to register!

Registration is still open as of November 20, 2013, for the 36th Annual National Institute on the Teaching of Psychol-ogy, January 3–6, 2014, at the TradeWinds Island Grand Resort in St. Pete Beach, FL. For the full program, other details about the conference, and to register online, vis-it www.nitop.org.

If you do not wish to register online, you can download the registration form from the webpage, complete it, and send it to the conference office by email (jfetzner@illinois.edu), fax (813-973-2835), or mail to: National Institute on the Teaching of Psychology, 27236 Edenfield Drive, Wesley Chapel, FL 33544. Please direct any questions to Joanne Fetzner by phone (813-973-6969) or email (jfetzner@illi-nois.edu). Come on down!