June, 2001
The Ecological-Community Psychology Program has been
designed to bring humanitarian and scientific thought and research to the
understanding and solution of critical human problems. For this reason,
students entering the program should have both scientific and humanitarian
interests. Ecological-Community
Psychology is concerned with a broad range of human problems. Violence against women, child-abuse,
juvenile delinquency, developmental disabilities, substance abuse, race
relations, over-population, mental health, educational deprivation, public
health delivery systems and alternative system creation are current examples of
such problems. The intent of the program is to produce psychologists who can
carry out socially relevant research aimed at understanding and solving such
problems in their natural setting.
It is recognized that students will vary in their
speed of progress through the program. It is the goal of the program that
students will complete the masters portion of the program in approximately two
to three years beyond the bachelors degree and the Ph.D. portion of the program in two to three years beyond the
masters. Students who enter the program
with a masters degree from another institution may be asked to complete a
master’s thesis equivalency paper if their master’s degree did not include a
research oriented thesis. Whether or
not a master’s equivalency paper is required is at the discretion of the
student’s doctoral guidance committee.
The following guidelines present a description of the
graduate program.
Advising Committees and Annual Program Planning
Sessions.
There are a number of processes through which
students and faculty collaborate concerning each student’s graduate
education. This includes concern for
course work, field work, assistantship, informal experiences, etc.
I. Planning
Sessions. Planning sessions are
regularly scheduled at least once a year.
The goal of the sessions is to provide a pro-active forum for
student-faculty interaction concerning individual student’s plans for and
progress in graduate education. Every
effort will be made to include the chairperson of the student's research committee
in these meetings. Students will have the opportunity to invite other faculty
members to attend. Areas to be considered in these meetings will include:
career goals, intervention in the community, research skills; course work;
financial support; and other educational experiences
II.Master’s Guidance Committee. Upon entry into the program, an incoming
masters level student is assigned a faculty member as temporary advisor. During
the second semester, the student must form a three person guidance committee of
at least two regular faculty members from the Department of Psychology, one of
whom will be a member of the Ecological-Community Psychology Interest
Group. This is done by discussing the
formation of this committee with the chair of one’s committee and then
involving two other faculty. Once this
committee is formed, the chair of the Master’s Guidance Committee will
officially become the student’s advisor.
The student and their guidance committee will jointly develop an
Master’s program of study consisting of courses, seminars, research, and
community experience. The program of study must be deposited in the office of
the associate chairperson by the end of the second semester of graduate
study. The master’s guidance committee
may waive or enhance the course requirements noted below.
II Doctoral Guidance Committee and Program of Study. For students admitted to the program with a
masters degree, they will also be assigned a faculty member as temporary
advisor. During the second semester following the completion of the master's
(for students admitted with a bachelor’s degree) or in the second semester
following program entry (for the student admitted with a master’s degree), the
student will work closely with their chair to prepare a plan of study. It will then be presented to their doctoral
guidance committee for approval.
For students admitted with a bachelor’s degree, it is
recognized that the doctoral guidance committee cannot be formed until the
Masters level work (courses and thesis) are completed. However, given that Masters level course
work is often completed by early in the second year and the thesis is typically
not completed by then, students will begin taking courses which will ultimately
be on their doctoral plan of study before the doctoral guidance committee is
formally assembled. In this common
situation, students are encouraged to consult closely with their chair in
planning their course work throughout their graduate careers.
The
doctoral guidance committee will consist of at least four faculty members (at
least three from the Department of Psychology). Membership on the committee may be identical or different from
the master's guidance committee, but must have at least one member of the
Ecological-Community Interest Group and may have a faculty member representing the
student's other area of interest (e.g. minor or cognate). Again, committee membership and program of
study must be filed with the associate chairperson. The doctoral guidance
committee oversees the administration of the comprehensive exam. The doctoral
Plan of Study should include any of the required courses that were not
completed for the master's degree. The
doctoral plan of study is filed with the Associate Chair’s Office, the Dean’s
Office, and the Graduate School. The
doctoral guidance committee may waive or enhance the course requirements noted
below.
Formal
Course Requirements.
All
students will be expected to acquire a sound background in psychology and
social science relevant to their chosen problem area. Specific required course work for all students is as
follows: Quantitative Research Design
and Analysis in Psychology (PSY815), Psychometric Methods (PSY817) and
Psychometric Theory and Test Construction (PSY818) or equivalent;
Ecological-Community Psychology (PSY870), History and Theory in
Ecological-Community Psychology (PSY871), Field Research in Psychology
(PSY872), & Community Interventions (PSY873 and PSY 992). Students are also required to enroll in 2
Advanced Topics in Ecological and Community Psychology (PSY970). These requirements may be met at the masters
or doctoral level.
I.Area
of Specialization and Breadth.
Ph.D.
students are required to become competent in an area outside of
ecological-community psychology and to become a multi-disciplinary scholar.
This requirement has two components. The first involves a minor or a
cognate. Each student must take either
a minor or a cognate. A minor
involves taking 12 semester credits in
some other area of psychology outside of ecological/community (e.g.,
organizational, developmental). A cognate involves taking 12 semester credits in a department other than
psychology or taking 12 credits
organized around a theme (e.g., measurement, youth issues) in more than one department. The Applied Developmental Science sequence
offers one such example of such an interdisciplinary cognate. The second component involves breadth. If
the student elects a minor in psychology, they are required to take six credits
outside of psychology. If they elect a cognate, they are required to take at
least six additional credits within psychology, not more than three of which
may be in ecological-community.
Students
must also meet departmental course requirements or other requirements agreed to
by the student his or her committee.
The student may also make a case to their committee to waive any of the
above requirements.
II The
Sequence of Course work.
During
the first year the student will enroll in PSY 815, 870, 871 & 992 in the
Fall Semester and 817, 872, & 873 in the Spring semester. Following the first year in graduate school,
the sequence of course work will be determined by either the relevant Plan of
Study.
Thesis,
Comprehensive Exams, and Dissertation
I. Master’s Thesis
The
primary goal of the masters thesis is for the student to begin gaining
experience in conducting community research.
A wide variety of topics, issues, theoretical perspectives and methods
may be used in the masters thesis. The
scope of the masters thesis may vary considerably across students, however a
number of benchmarks are relevant.
First, the thesis could begin as early as the end of the student’s first
year in the program. It is the goal of
the program that the thesis be finished by early in the student’s third
year. Second, while the methods may
also vary across students, it should be kept in mind that a reasonable thesis
project will be accomplished within a 12 month time frame from proposal
acceptance to thesis completion. In
this regard, data collection should not extend beyond a six month period. Third, the research methodology should be
driven by the student’s research question and the methodological scope (e.g.
sample, numbers of constructs or variables, measures, sites) of the project
should be reasonable given the six month data collection time frame and resources
available to the student.
The
topic area for the thesis may be driven by the student’s area of interest or
may involve the student taking advantage of ongoing projects or existing data
sets.. In combination with the
dissertation, the masters thesis should build skills relevant to the student’s
career goals. The thesis is carried out
in a community setting. It may include
a needs assessment, intervention, survey, longitudinal, systems analysis,
qualitative, or quantitative methodology.
It is often desirable, but not required, that the thesis serve as a
prelude to the dissertation in terms of topic area, theoretical perspective,
setting, or methodology.
A. Master’s thesis committee.
The
thesis committee is comprised of at least three faculty. Two of the three must be members of the
Psychology Department. One of the three
must be a member of the Ecological Interest Group. Three of the committee members must be regular faculty (as
defined by the Graduate Student Handbook).
There may be additional committee members.
B. Master’s thesis process.
Procedurally,
the thesis is done working closely with a chair and two additional members of
the thesis committee. The student
prepares a proposal working closely with the chair. The proposal includes an introduction, literature review, and
proposed methodology. After the student
and the chair are satisfied with the proposal, it is distributed to the other
thesis committee members. A proposal
defense/thesis planning meeting is then held.
A defense meeting usually consists of a brief oral presentation by the
student followed by questions from the committee. The conclusion of the meeting involves reaching consensus as to
precisely how the thesis will be completed.
This often involves revision in the research proposal put forth. Once the committee has approved the
proposal, the student executes the proposed research using faculty as resources
as needed. Once the master’s project is
completed, a master’s thesis document is prepared by the student working
closely with the chair. This may
involve several drafts. After the
student and the chair are satisfied with the thesis, it is distributed to the
other committee members for review. A
final defense of the master’s thesis is then held. In terms of process, the final defense is similar to the proposal
defense.
II Comprehensive
Examinations
A.Goals
Comprehensives
in ecological/community psychology have two aims. First, comprehensives provide an opportunity for the student to
integrate knowledge and skills and/or develop a particular skill or
competency about his/her professional aims. The comprehensives are designed to
be individually tailored in format to allow for maximum fit between the mode of
the comprehensives and the style, needs, and goals of the student. Second,
comprehensives provide the opportunity for the student to be evaluated on
his/her readiness to complete the doctoral degree. Students will be evaluated
on the degree to which they are competent to perform as independent scholars. In
short, the comprehensives aim to provide students with additional work in both
the breadth and depth of the field. The comprehensives are designed to insure
that all students are knowledgeable of community/ecological psychology in
general and how it applies to their specific sub-field of interest. The
philosophy of the Ecological/Community Psychology Program is that every attempt
will be made to have students complete the comprehensives successfully. It is specifically not the intent to
use the comprehensives to sort out students.
B.Areas
to be Covered
Comprehensive
exams can be accomplished through a variety of formats. It is the intention
that the same areas of knowledge will be assessed by each comprehensive option.
In the interest of providing specification of the areas to be covered by all
options, the list below is provided. This list may not be exhaustive, but it
provides the basic areas to be addressed by all comprehensives options. In
addition, these areas are not mutually exclusive, but represent broadly defined
domains. While specific areas may receive differential attention based on
individual student needs and educational goals, the evaluation standards for
all students and all options are the same. In other words, all students will be
held accountable for demonstrating the same knowledge, though the format of the
comprehensives may vary.
1. Background Information
a.
History and Systems. This area
is necessarily very broad in nature and involves coverage of the historical perspectives
that defined the field, the values that guided the development of the field,
and alternate historical models that impacted the field (e.g.,
person-environment fit, value base, collaboration, prevention as a service
ideology, multilevel conception of behavior, philosophies of science, etc).
Examples of this domain include the major historical and theoretical events
leading to the development of community/ecological psychology.
b. Major Theoretical Positions. This area should cover the major theoretical
positions or philosophies in the field. This domain will be interdisciplinary
in scope and will include coverage of individual, group, organizational,
institutional, and societal perspectives as applicable. Depending on a student's particular
interest, this area could also include specific theories pertinent to that
particular problem. Examples of this
domain include such major theoretical positions as ecological models,
empowerment theory, organizational theory, etc.
2.Contemporary
Work
a. Social Change Strategies. This area needs to address the major
intervention paradigms and approaches used in the field. The comprehensives
will need to demonstrate linkages, or lack thereof, to the theoretical
positions or social philosophies covered above. This analysis will provide the
background for an in depth description of the field's major intervention
approaches. Examples of this domain include alternative setting creation,
prevention, self help, dissemination,
policy change, organizational change, consultation, community organizing,
advocacy, etc.
b. Knowledge of Existing Research. This area should include coverage of the
research results presented in the scientific literature. Description and
critique of the existing research in the field are both included. Examples of
this domain include literature reviews, meta-analyses, methodological critique,
etc.
c. Research Design. This area should
include knowledge of research designs and logical inference procedures used in
the field and critiques of their adequacy for addressing the important
questions. Examples include review of designs used, critique of the adequacy of
the designs, and alternative research designs. Coverage should include
experimental designs, quasi experimental designs, case study designs, and qualitative
methods. This area also includes coverage of statistical techniques.
d. Assessment Procedures. This area should include coverage of the
major assessment and measurement approaches. Central to this area should be
coverage of the adequacy of the major approaches to assessment, i.e.,
participant-observation, systematic observation, interviewing, paper-pencil
surveys/questionnaires, etc. There
should also be a concern with the applicability of relevant measurement
approaches and their psychometric adequacy in terms of reliability, validity,
and generalizability.
3. Ethics and Social Values.
This
area should include coverage of potential and existing ethical issues in the
field in terms of treatment of participants. The social values implied in the
use of the social change and/or measurement techniques should also be
discussed.
4. Future Directions and Policy Implications.
This
area should include a projection of future work that needs to be done in the
field and the policy implication of the work to date. Included would be
suggested future theoretical developments, change strategies, research
methodologies, and systems of implementation.
C.General
Format for Administering the Comprehensive.
1. Timing.
Students
are expected to take their comprehensives after the completion of the master's
thesis and must complete comprehensives exams before submission of the
doctoral dissertation proposal. It is expected that each student will complete
the comprehensives option of their choice within 24 months of the completion of
the master's degree. For those students who come to the Program with a masters
degree from another institution, it is expected that they will complete the
comprehensives option of their choice within 24 months of program entry. If the
comprehensives are not completed within this time frame, the student will be
required to take the written exam option within the subsequent three months. In
other words, it is expected that all students will complete comprehensives
within 27 months of the completion of their master's degree or program entry,
whichever is applicable. All comprehensives options will be completed within
three months of being proposed.
2. The Comprehensive Proposal.
Each
of the options described below will be carried out according to a general
format consisting of an agreement between the student and doctoral guidance
committee. Each option calls for the
student to propose to the committee, in writing, the option that will be taken
and a detailed plan for execution. The
proposal will describe two areas.
First,
the format of the comprehensive option will be described and how it will be
executed will be detailed. For example, a proposal for a written test will
specify the areas to be covered. A reading list will detail the material for
which the student will be held responsible. A proposal for a course will
include all of the areas to be covered in the course, a preliminary syllabus,
and an outline of the final product. A proposal for a review paper will provide
a detailed description of the literature to be covered and a tentative outline
of the review including a specification of the methodology to be employed. A
proposal for a grant application will include a statement specifying the
potential funding agency, a detailed summary of the domains to be covered, and
a preliminary outline of the grant. The
proposal should also include a detailed time line for completion including: 1)
a deadline for completion of comprehensive not to exceed three months from the
time of acceptance of the proposal, 2) provisions for faculty review of drafts,
and 3) contingencies in the case of a failed comprehensive that specify issues
of timing and form of any retake option.
Second,
the proposal will detail how each of the areas mentioned above will be covered
in the particular option selected. In other words, the proposal will specify
how History and Systems, Major Theoretical Positions, etc. will be covered.
A
meeting between the student and the doctoral guidance committee will occur before
the comprehensive begins. This meeting will result in a written agreement
between the student and the committee as to what will be expected for the
comprehensive.
3. Grading System.
Each
option will be graded using the following system. It is the expectation that
students will demonstrate performance in the comprehensives commensurate with
that expected of independent scholars at the doctoral level. Demonstration of
that level of proficiency is the criterion for successfully completing the
comprehensive. Each member will provide the following ratings of performance on
the comprehensive.
Pass
- performance indicative of demonstrating knowledge/skills expected of an
independent scholar.
Pass
with revisions - performance that requires minor modification to achieve a
pass. To assign this rating, the individual faculty member must specify in
writing what would be needed to make the performance achieve a pass.
Fail
- performance failing to demonstrate knowledge/skills expected of an
independent scholar.
The
student will pass the comprehensives if he/she receives at least 75%
"pass" ratings. The student will fail the comprehensive if he/she
receives more than 25% "fail" ratings. If he/she does not receive 75%
pass ratings and not more than 25% fail ratings, he/she may do revisions. For
example, if the student selected the review paper option, he/she would receive
a single rating from each guidance committee member and need to receive passing
ratings from at least three-quarters of the committee members in order to pass
out right. If the student selected the written test, he/she would need to
receive pass ratings on three-quarters of the ratings given. In this instance,
it would be expected that each committee member would rate all four answers
resulting in at least 16 ratings and requiring 12 pass ratings. If revision is
an option, the student may elect to rewrite only the parts of the
comprehensives necessary to attain 75%. If successful, the student would then
pass the comprehensives.
At
the completion of the comprehensives, the student may request a second meeting
with his/her chair, individual faculty, or the committee as a group for the
purposes of discussing the comprehensives and receiving feedback.
D.Options
for Comprehensive
1.Written
Test
a. Format.
Each
faculty member on the student's doctoral guidance committee will submit to the
student's chair two essay questions to be answered in writing. The questions
will cover the domains outlined by a reading list that must be part of the
students comprehensives proposal.
The
student has two options for taking the test. In the first option, on an
agreed upon date, the student will receive eight questions (two from each of
four committee members). During the next 48 hours, the student would prepare
answers to four of the eight questions (one of each of the two submitted by
each committee member chosen by the student) in a take-home format. At the end
of the 48 hours, the written answers would be turned in. A strict 10 page limit (typed, double
spaced, one inch margins, 12 CPI) per question applies
In
the second option, on an agreed on date, the student would receive four
questions (two from each of two committee members). During the next 24 hours,
he/she would prepare answers to two of the four questions (one of each of the
two submitted by each committee member) in a take home format. The same page
limit per question applies. At the end of the 24 hours, the answers would be
turned in. After a 24-hour pause, the
process would be repeated with questions from the two remaining committee
members.
b. Administration.
The
written exam will be administered by the chair of the student's doctoral
guidance committee. Each committee member will evaluate their submitted
question and at least one other comprehensive exam question, although
the chair may request that all committee members evaluate all questions. Thus,
all four questions will have at least two evaluators.
2.Review
Paper
Students
will prepare a comprehensive review of an area of particular professional and
scientific interest. The goal of the review paper is to allow the student a
format for developing and reinforcing writing skills and to increase his/her
expertise in an area of interest. The proposal for this option will take the
form of a detailed outline for a literature review covering some social,
theoretical, or empirical area of particular interest to the student. The topic
of the review paper can be, but does not have to be, consistent with the topic
planned for the dissertation. The review paper is not to exceed 40 pages,
double spaced, one inch margins, 12 CPI excluding references. When the proposal
is approved by all committee members, the student will proceed to write and
submit to the committee a review paper covering the material proposed. The
review paper is modeled after articles appearing in Psychological Bulletin,
Psychological Review, American Sociological Review, Social Service
Review, etc.
3.Grant
Application
The
student will prepare a grant application in an area of particular professional
and scientific interest. The proposal
will take the form of a detailed outline and will include history of the
problem, review of prominent theory, review of existing research, proposed
methodology, detailed budget and budget narrative, and ethical issues. Upon
acceptance by the committee, the student will proceed to write and submit to
the committee a formal grant application. In essence the grant application
option would include most of the material in a review paper in addition to the
proposal of an innovation research project. The model for the grant application
option is an NIH, NSF, NIJ, NIAA, etc., proposal. The body of the grant application (excludes budget, budget
narrative, ethical issues, tables, references, and appendices) may not exceed
25 single spaced pages (one inch margins, 12 CPI).
4.Design
and Teach of an Undergraduate Course
The
student will prepare and teach a course in Psychology, typically Psychology 270
- Introduction to Community Psychology.
It is possible to teach a course other than Psychology 270 for
comprehensives only if an argument is made that the substitute course is
relevant to the student's career goals and that the course covers the
domains of the comprehensives specified by the guidelines. The proposal will
comply with departmental requirements as to content. Students electing this
option are referred to the Associate Chair's office for details. In general,
the proposal requires a course description, a course syllabus, an outline of
all class sessions, a complete write-up of at least one class session, and a
plan for student evaluations.
The
final product will consist of a complete write-up of all lectures, handouts,
homework assignments, tests, quizzes, exercises, evaluation procedures, etc.
for the course. The write-up will include the final course syllabus and
a list of all material read by the instructor to actually teach the course. It
must also include copies of student evaluations. Due to scheduling demands, the
course write-up may need to be turned in more than three months from the time
it is proposed. In this instance, students are reminded to make proposals for
teaching relatively early in their graduate careers so that they may be
completed within the 24 month post-M.A. time frame.
5.Other
options.
The
student may propose other options for the comprehensives to their guidance
committee consistent with these general guidelines.
E. Policy Regarding Retaking a Failed
Comprehensive.
It
was indicated earlier that each proposal concerning for comprehensives must
specify: 1) a deadline for completion of comprehensive not to exceed three
months from the time of acceptance of the proposal, 2) provisions for faculty
review of drafts, and 3) contingencies in the case of a failed comprehensive
that specify issues of timing and form of any retake option. All candidates who
fail their first comprehensive attempt will have the opportunity to retake
them. University regulations specify that if a student fails the comprehensives
twice, they will not be allowed to
continue graduate studies in the doctoral program.
F. Study Guides
In
order to make students aware of the criteria for comprehensives, the program
will keep copies of past comprehensives on file. Copies will be provided with
the permission of individual students. In order to keep the file up to date,
the file will be purged periodically..
III. Ph.D. Dissertation and Dissertation
Committee.
The
goal of the doctoral dissertation is for the student to independently carry out
community research. To form a dissertation committee, the student develops a
dissertation proposal with the assistance of the faculty member chosen as
chair. Membership on this committee may be identical to or different from the
doctoral guidance committee. The
process for proposing, completing, and defending the doctoral dissertation is
identical to that described for the masters thesis. The proposal outlines the dissertation problem and details the
method. The proposal is submitted to the other potential committee members. The
doctoral dissertation committee must consist of at least four faculty, three of
whom are regular members of the Psychology department, and one of whom is a
member of Ecological-Community Interest Group. Once a committee is formed they
meet to discuss with the student the final form of the dissertation. The
dissertation must study the problem in its naturalistic setting. After students have completed the Ph.D.
dissertation project and have written the dissertation to the satisfaction of
their committee chair, the committee administers an oral examination over the
dissertation material. Although not
required, it is recommended that the completion of the Ph.D. dissertation
should be accompanied by a formal presentation to the interest group.