Orchestrating Authorship

Abstract

This article describes the kinds of writing that could be introduced at the beginner, intermediate, and advanced course levels in the psychology major. We present exemplars of writing assignments across three institutions, including textual analysis, integrating intratext and intertext writing, and a capstone thesis project, where the skills learned in each assignment could inform those that follow in later years. Furthermore, this article addresses potential developmental progressions within each assignment as well. We present preliminary assessments of individual assignments and suggestions for evaluating developmental gains across the curriculum. To conclude, we discuss the value of teaching writing of increasing complexity across the psychology curriculum, and the importance of evaluating the effectiveness of such a program in the future.

Keywords

writing curricular issues student development

Thinkers and writers become better thinkers and writers by thinking and writing. (Eble, 1976, p. 92)

Educators in psychology have grappled with pedagogical concerns regarding the teaching of writing for several decades (McGovern & Hogshead, 1990; Stewart, Myers, & Culley, 2010). Informed by interdisciplinary writing courses, McGovern and Hogshead (1990) discussed the need to both assign and assess writing in psychology. Having reviewed articles on writing published in the Teaching of Psychology, they identified four objectives for including writing in the psychology curriculum: (a) to assess students, (b) to promote student learning, (c) to develop student writing skills, and (d) to facilitate analytic and creative thinking and problem solving. More recently, the American Psychological Association (APA, 2007, 2008) guidelines for undergraduate psychology include an emphasis on the importance of teaching and learning writing. Scholarship on teaching and learning (SoTL) has provided empirical evidence for greater student involvement in courses and better performance on evaluations, when coursework includes writing (Beers, 1985; Cathey, 2007; Drabick, Weisberg, Paul, & Bubier, 2007; Procidano, 1991; Stewart et al., 2010).

This article extends previous work by addressing the benefits of matching writing assignments to course levels and providing practical suggestions for making assignments developmentally appropriate. If the psychology curriculum is developmentally structured to progress from introductory to advanced courses to foster student learning (Dunn et al., 2010), it is reasonable to argue that they may benefit from writing assignments that match this gradual increase in complexity. Based on the recommendations of Beins, Smith, and Dunn (2010), we present writing assignments and assessments from three institutions that are applied exemplars designed for the beginner, intermediate, and advanced psychology student, respectively, although their developmental value has not yet been assessed. In the spirit of making SoTL goals explicit (Gurung, Ansburg, Alexander, Lawrence & Johnson, 2008), we provide instructions for the assignments, ways to evaluate the individual assignments, and examples of student feedback. Ideas for assessing potential developmental gains across assignments in the future, within a single departmental program, are addressed as well.

Pitch Perfect: Matching Writing Assignments to Course Levels in Psychology

When beginning a review of a psychology department’s writing curriculum, we suggest that department chairs as well as faculty members ask themselves a series of basic questions: Do department members agree on the importance of writing for psychology as a major and as a general skill? Is writing routinely assigned throughout all levels of the curriculum? Are the courses structured sequentially (i.e., beginner to advanced), which allows instructors to create progressive writing assignments at each level of the department’s curriculum?

We believe that instructors could tailor writing assignments to match the respective demands of courses at the beginner, intermediate, and advanced levels. Our goal in this section is to suggest ways to develop writing assignments that best match the intended learning goals of these course levels. Concurring opinion for our arguments appear in the APA Guidelines for the Undergraduate Psychology Major (APA, 2007), Teaching, Learning, and Assessing in a Developmentally Coherent Curriculum (APA, 2008), and the Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education (Halpern et al., 2010). We now consider the qualities associated with writing assignments pitched to beginner, intermediate, and advanced courses in psychology (Beins, Smith, & Dunn, 2010).

Writing in Beginner Courses (100 and 200 Level)

Introductory courses explore psychology broadly (consider the wide-ranging table of contents found in most general psychology books) while encouraging critical thinking about behavior. The structural characteristics of introductory courses, as well as the heterogeneous population of students who enroll in them, indicate that writing assignments that are brief in length, assigned frequently, and focused on assessing students’ reflections and reactions to class readings and discussions may be most suited for this course level. Other aspects of writing assignments for introductory level courses, including sample writing prompts, are shown in the top of Table 1.

Table 1.

Nature of Writing Assignments at Different Course Levels.

Introductory Level Writing
Opinion should be tempered by evidence (Halonen et al., 2003)
Use of disciplinary language could be encouraged, but main goal is to apply psychological concepts to daily life
Writing assignments could be short but frequent (five or fewer pages) and may be formatted using APA style
Provide students with concrete question or prompt
Example (Introductory psychology): “Write your own definition for the discipline of psychology. Use examples from our readings to support your definition”
Example (Adjustment): “Describe a common stressor that college students experience. Suggest two ways students can learn to constructively cope with the stressor”
Intermediate Level Writing
Still somewhat reflective but focused on specific question or issue related to topical course
Students could use theory and vocabulary
Students demonstrate understanding of methodology
Critical thinking about behavior is apparent (e.g., Halonen et al., 2003).
Writing assignments are longer (5–10 pages) and formatted using APA style
Provide students with a prompt or ask them to develop a topic tied to some course issue
Example (Social psychology): “Baumrind (1964) argued that Milgram’s obedience paradigm defied ethical conventions. Milgram (1964) disagreed. Summarize their respective positions and then offer your own view on the ethics of the obedience paradigm”
Advanced Level Writing
Papers will be longer (15–25 pages) but well-edited, formatted, and structured with headings and subheadings
Topics will be student generated and refined with guidance of instructor, and include:
Traditional empirical research papers written in APA-style
Traditional literature review papers written in APA-style
Honors thesis
Independent study papers
Service learning project papers

Note. Adapted from Beins, Smith, and Dunn (2010).

Writing in Intermediate (300-Level) Courses

Intermediate courses build on basic skills and offer guided practice in methodologies and ways of thinking and knowing relevant to subdisciplines of psychology (e.g., developmental psychology, social psychology, clinical psychology). Such subdisciplinary content may engage students interested in becoming psychology majors and help them to acquire deeper knowledge and skills. Writing assignments in intermediate courses could encourage significant personal engagement with the material, so that students synthesize ideas from a subdiscipline while also trying to express original ideas within its framework of reference. Additional aspects of intermediate writing assignments, which are much more involved than introductory ones, appear in the middle of Table 1.

Writing in Advanced (400-Level and Above) Courses

The challenging nature of advanced courses could help students to focus on and develop higher order thinking skills, such as analysis and synthesis, and the ability to offer critiques (including self-critique). Courses here at the highest level of undergraduate discourse could move students toward being producers of psychological knowledge—not just consumers. Writing assignments could give students the opportunity to define problems on their own terms and to create and explore original ideas in psychology relevant to the course topic. Thus, writing assignments could foster independence and mimic the professional activities pursued by psychologists who are educators, writers, and researchers. The bottom third of Table 1 lists familiar types of papers that fit these guidelines (see also Dunn, 2011).

In the preceding section, we described key developmental factors for instructors to consider when designing writing assignments. In the next sections, we build on this idea by presenting assignments implementing the goals of beginner, intermediate, and advanced level writing as outlined by Beins et al. (2010), where the skills learned in the lower levels could be incorporated in the higher levels of writing, thereby providing some tools to assess and implement a developmental approach to teaching writing.

Exemplar for Beginner (200-Level) Writing: Tuning-Up With Analysis

The “Tuning-Up” assignment was embedded within a 200-level course entitled The Psychology of Women. Course goals include preparing students for intermediate level thinking and writing, by applying analytical skills to course content and every day experiences. In this course, students examine the intersection of gender with other dimensions of social identity and are asked to demonstrate an understanding of various ways these identities are shaped by social structures.

Building Blocks Within the Analytical Assignment

The micro developmental transition within this assignment is the ability to differentiate between description and analysis and make connections between discussions about this distinction and the course readings. In preparing for the writing assignment, students devise a working definition of both description and analysis as a class. Description is typically reduced to the idea of stating “what you see,” whereas analysis is akin to stating “what it means.” Then the class focuses on an everyday object as an example. For example, because there is often a water bottle somewhere in the classroom, we practiced by describing it. Students state that it is plastic, it is clear, it has a label, and so on. We follow up by exploring what those descriptors mean in our application of analysis. Why is it plastic? Why is it clear? Students often explain that it is plastic because it is inexpensive, so it will not break; it is clear so that consumers can see that it is water, and so on. In our subsequent discussion of course readings, students are required to identify specific instances of description and analysis, completing the final step in preparation for the analytical essay.

While practicing identifying analysis in course readings, a metaphor for analytical writing is also used for explanation. Students must “build a train” in their paper, in response to each component of the assignment. This “train” consists of three parts. First, the train tracks are the foundation, and consist of the description. This is where we “say what we see.” The second part is the train car, which stands in for the meaning. This is where we “say what it means.” The third part of the train is the wheels, representing connections to course readings, with specific in-text citations in APA format. The metaphor is a reminder that analysis must include these three components, and that while the tracks and the train car are absolutely necessary, the train will not move without the wheels, or connection to text.

Description of the Analytical Essay Assignment

The writing assignment is an analytical essay of print advertisements that addresses representations of race, class, gender, sexuality, and some of the psychological consequences of the images. Students analyze two pieces of print media advertising using the insights gained from the films and the assigned reading (Berger, 1977; Higginbotham, 1996; Jhally, 2000, 2007; Lips, 2006). Students write a five page essay addressing each of the following questions:

How are girls and/or women portrayed in these ads? How are boys and/or men portrayed?

Are gender role stereotypes reinforced in the ads?

How do these ads relate to or differ from the films and assigned reading?

How are race, class, and sexuality constructed in these ads?

How does advertising (images, language, camera angle, values, concepts, stories, myths, colors) function as a force of socialization?

What might be the desired effect of the images in your ads? How do you think they are intended to make the viewer feel? What might be some of the psychological effects of your ads?

Why did you choose these ads? What did you learn from this assignment?

The assignment instructions are discussed in class, where answers to the questions of the assignment are verbally modeled on a sample advertisement. First, we must “lay the tracks” by describing the ad. For example, one student analyzed an ad by a coat designer: “In this ad, a woman is shown wearing a trench coat that is strategically placed to cover her naked body underneath.” Next, we “build the train car,” explaining meaning or significance. For example this student continued, “The woman in this ad is unmistakably on display, and aware that she is being watched.” Finally, we must “attach the wheels,” connecting the explanation to course readings, with specific in-text citations in APA format. For example, this student explained, “This image is significant because according to social learning theory, an individual internalizes her culture’s messages about acceptable behavior, and therefore learns how to be a woman. She imitates others who model for her the attitudes and characteristics associated with being feminine.” The student cited the appropriate source of social learning theory, in this case, the course textbook by Lips (2006). Sample essays are posted on the course website. Finally, students work in groups of two or three, sharing their ads and practicing answering the questions together.

Evaluation of the Analytical Essay Assignment

Students selected an ad of personal interest for this analytical exercise and applied psychological knowledge to their everyday experiences. Student familiarity with popular culture was encouraged as a form of expertise. The preceding strategies reflect those identified by Beins et al. (2010) for engaging beginner students. Evaluation of student grades indicated that 88.2% of students earned a C—(70%) or higher on this assignment, while 68.6% earned a B—(80%) or higher. The mean score on this assignment overall was 82.4 (SD = 10.78). Student evaluations of this assignment were both quantitative and qualitative and were solicited anonymously after graded papers were returned.

Students rated statements on a 5-point Likert-type scale anchored with 5 indicating strongly agree and 1 indicating strongly disagree (N = 51). For example, “The discussions about the difference between description and analysis helped prepare me for this assignment” (M = 4.31, SD = 0.62). Students rated the identification of analysis in course texts as beneficial: “Our discussions about the supplemental readings and films helped me to recognize how these authors presented their analyses in their own work” (M = 4.51, SD = 0.50). Modeling and peer discussions were also rated positively: “Our practice analysis of an ad in class and the group work that followed helped me to prepare for this assignment” (M = 4.45, SD = 0.61). The evaluation included the question, “What did this teach you about the process of analysis? How?” One student responded, “This assignment helped me to understand how to actually analyze rather than just describe and discuss. I learned how to connect my ideas together to make an argument. This helped me in other classes as well when asked to write analysis papers.” Another student expressed the connections she made between psychology and everyday life: “It helps me pull the meaning from the texts and apply it to the outside world. It makes the texts easier to understand because I actually have to sit there and think about it and apply its meaning to other contexts.”

Because ads have so many kinds of representations and are ubiquitous in popular culture, this assignment could be easily applied in other 200-level courses such as Child Development, Adolescence, Social Psychology, and Human Sexuality, for example. Teaching analysis through recognition (in course texts), metaphor (building a train), practice (as a class and in groups), and application (through personal engagement) could tune-up the development of a necessary skill for upper-level thinking and writing. Further, to foster programmatic assessment in the future, instructors could consider embedding analysis as a component in their grading rubrics in intermediate and advanced classes, to assess whether a greater percentage of students are able to meet the C requirement in this aspect of the assignment later in their developmental trajectory than at the beginner phase.

Exemplar for Intermediate (300-Level) Writing: Synchronizing Intratext and Intertext Writing

The instructor embedded this writing assignment within an Abnormal Psychology course taught at the intermediate level. This course is a 300-level class in a 100–400 level undergraduate system. Most students completed English Composition, Introduction to Psychology, and one 200-level psychology course prior to taking this class. Their writing experience was minimal, however, because many 200-level courses in this instructor’s department do not include analysis of peer-reviewed empirical research. This lack of analytical experience in intermediate students underscores the need for more writing practice and developmental preparation across the curriculum.

Cerdán and Vidal-Abarca (2008) identified two kinds of learning. The first was intratext learning, which is comprised of learning information that is presented from a single source. In the present task, this refers to selecting and paraphrasing particular types of information from the assigned textbook. The second was intertext learning, which requires the integration of information across multiple sources. In the present assignment, this means selecting, analyzing, and synthesizing a subset of information across at least two peer-reviewed journal articles. Since analysis is embedded within this intermediate assignment, students might have benefited from practicing analysis at a beginner 200-level prior to this course. Cerdan and Vidal-Abarca found better transfer of knowledge to novel situations with intertext rather than intratext assignments. Combining intratext and intertext writing requires synchrony, so that together, they inform the psychological topic at hand and reflect the microdevelopmental process within this assignment.

Goals and Description of the Intratext–Intertext Writing Assignment

The instructor’s goals for this intermediate level writing assignment reflect some of those identified by Beins et al. (2010) for the intermediate and advanced levels of writing. Several goals are presented in Table 2. Gurung and Wilson-Doenges (2010) stated the importance of fostering student engagement in courses through promoting student engagement with faculty and peers; developing critical thinking/problem-solving skills; developing written skills; and information literacy, among other recommendations.

Table 2.

The Ten Goals of the Writing Assignment.

Assignment Goals
(1) Personal Engagement: Students write a paper on a disorder of interest from among those topics addressed in the course (e.g., Depression or Schizophrenia)
(2) Definition of the Problem: Students identify the subtopics of the disorder (e.g., demographics, subtypes, symptoms, theoretical bases for causes and treatments) and develop a group theme for the literature review where each person works on one of three components (e.g., three treatments of depression)
(3) Independent Exploration of Ideas: Students conduct an independent literature search based on the theme and its three components
(4) Language: Students use the vocabulary of the subdiscipline (e.g., clinical psychology) to describe aspects of the disorder and primary research on the topic
(5) Theory: Students describe theoretical bases for the disorder and related treatments
(6) Methodology: Students differentiate between research designs and the kinds of questions that they address and answer by reading peer-reviewed journal articles on empirical research
(7) Critical Thinking: Students evaluate the results and interpretations of empirical research
(8) Synthesis: Students integrate information from multiple sources
(9) Coconstruct Knowledge with Peers: Students contribute to peer learning by writing components of the paper and by sharing their strengths in group work (e.g., technology skills in the literature search, language skills, or knowledge of APA style writing)
(10) Write and revise: Students learn through experience that good writing requires sound sources and multiple revisions

To facilitate the preceding mechanisms for engagement, students in Abnormal Psychology write a 10-page paper on a disorder of personal interest selected from a list included in the course syllabus. For this assignment, they are placed into groups of three individuals. The instructor uses this research-based writing assignment to increase student investment and interest in the subject matter (Procidano, 1991). The paper structure begins with a half page introduction that ends with a thesis statement, foreshadowing the rest of the paper. The second part of the paper is a descriptive intratext task, where students describe several aspects of the disorder in three pages, based on information provided in the assigned textbook (e.g., demographics, subtypes, symptoms, theoretical bases for causes, and treatments). Students share the writing involved in parts one and two, providing peer review to each other. The third part of the paper is written individually, where students write two pages on their research component of the group theme (e.g., one of three treatments for depression). This third part of the paper is an intertext task, where students analyze and synthesize information across the textbook and two peer-reviewed journal articles on their own literature review, creating variations on the group theme. The articles must be from different journal sources for variety of perspective, and at least one of them must be an original empirical quantitative study. The fourth part of the paper is a half-page conclusion that is a summative commentary on the research presented in the paper. The fifth and final part is the reference page, where students are responsible for their own sources. The final product requires the use of APA-style writing and flow across transitions in the paper to create coherence.

Building Blocks Within the Intratext–Intertext Writing Assignment

The resources for this assignment include class time and online posting. Early in the semester the class discusses research methods in Abnormal Psychology, differentiating between case studies, correlations, experiments, and quasi experiments. The instructor introduces the assignment sheet online, describing the requirements of the assignment including formatting, structure, and the grading rubric. The instructor dedicates a class period to explain the assignment sheet and address student questions. Hands-on bibliographic instruction is provided by a librarian, where students are also provided a handout regarding online search procedures prepared for this assignment in particular. Students follow the steps of the search procedure in vivo at a computer lab. Because good writing requires good sources, at the next class period students follow-up at a computer lab, where they develop group themes and search for relevant peer-reviewed journal articles, facilitated by consulting with the instructor on-site. The instructor posts a sample outline of a paper online, so that students can use it as a guide to frame their group paper outline. Students submit the topic of study (a mental disorder), and an outline of the paper that includes the research theme and its three components (such as three treatments), as well as a thesis statement. Students also submit all six journal articles (two per person) for evaluation at that time, together with matching PsycInfo^© detailed records that contain the article title, journal source and publication information, author names, abstract, peer-review status, and methodology, to verify that all required criteria are met. Group members share their varied skills from technological expertise to writing techniques, diversity perspectives, and group dynamics. Students receive feedback on their group submissions in class, including clarification and correction of their group theme and thesis statement. In addition, the instructor posts sample paragraphs of intratext and intertext writing that use APA style, to guide students’ construction of paragraphs. Finally, students submit copies of the writing assignments to the Writing Center on campus for feedback.

Grading Rubric for the Intratext–Intertext Assignment

The grading rubric has two parts as shown in Table 3. The first is for the process of writing and the second is for the written product. Although this is a group writing assignment, 75% of the points are earned on individual work so that students can benefit from the advantages of peer collaboration without its potential disadvantages.

Table 3.

Student Points on the Paper Based on the Grading Rubric.

	Points (N = 78)
	M	SD
Part I—process (50 points—all individual)	47.82	6.83
2 × 10 individual points for PsycInfo detailed records
2 × 10 individual points for full-text peer- reviewed journal articles
10 individual points for writing center feedback
Part II—product (50 points—25 individual and 25 shared)	32.90	6.68
5 shared points for the introductory paragraph	3.00	0.85
15 shared points for the intratext description of the disorder	11.00	2.14
15 individual points for the integrative intertext research review	10.82	2.21
5 shared points for the conclusion	3.08	0.85
5 individual points for APA style citation in text	2.33	0.85
5 individual points for the references	2.67	1.30
Total points for paper (100)	80.72	12.07

Evaluation of the Intratext and Intertext Writing Assignment

Evaluation of the assignment had two components. The first was grade points on the paper based on the grading rubric as shown in Table 4. Students performed significantly better on the process (gathering sources and revisions) than on the product (writing of the final paper), t(77) = 21.76, p < .001, d = 2.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) [13.56, 16.29], N = 78. Whereas 94.9% of students met a grade of C-(70 points) on the overall final paper, 97.4% met this criterion for process but only 44.9% met it for the product. Clearly, these intermediate-level students needed more experience in writing before proceeding to advanced courses in the psychology curriculum. Student feedback on the assignment constituted the second part of evaluation, as shown in Table 4. On a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (disagree) to 5 (agree) students reported that writing the outline and thesis statement were the most helpful of the resources and that the lecture on research methods in Abnormal Psychology was the least useful, but all responses to the questions were rated higher than average. Although students reported that they found the resources and the overall assignment useful, their writing products reflected the need for more writing practice across the curriculum. This assignment included an analytical component that could be assessed at the introductory and intermediate course levels if conducted within a single department, to assess potential macro developmental gains across the psychology curriculum.

Table 4.

Student Feedback Questionnaire.

	M	SD
	(N = 71)
1. Writing a paper outline and getting help with the thesis statement was useful	4.55	0.73
2. Overall, despite the difficulties and benefits of working in a group, the writing assignment gave me practice in APA-style writing	4.37	0.64
3. The sample paragraphs posted on Blackboard demonstrating how to write a paragraph about research content and how to write a paragraph on descriptive content from the textbook, were helpful	4.25	0.86
4. I became more familiar with PsycInfo after using it for this Assignment	4.23	0.74
5. I became more familiar with reading original journal articles in the field of Psychology based on this assignment	4.15	0.67
6. I got practice in stating material from the textbook and the journal Articles in my own words	4.07	0.68
7. The lecture on correlations and experimental designs helped me to understand the content I read in the journal articles	3.70	0.86

Note. The scale ranged from 1 to 5, where higher scores indicated more positive evaluation.

Exemplar for Advanced (400-Level) Writing: Scoring the Finale in Thesis Writing

The final exemplar of thesis writing as a capstone seminar incorporates analysis and synthesis as described in the beginner and intermediate writing assignments, reflecting the potential macro-level developmental approach to writing. Further, an apprenticeship model for thesis writing is described, where students work with faculty not just in their senior year but at various stages in their development in the major.

Development of the Thesis Capstone Experience Across the Curriculum

This program emphasizes both theory and research methods, which do not only emerge from students’ experiences in traditional, content-focused courses. Faculty and senior thesis projects are discussed in beginner and advanced psychology courses, and upper-level psychology students serve as course mentors. These mentors attend courses, provide assistance in writing assignments, facilitate class activities, and conduct exam review sessions. Such “vertical mentoring” (cf. Rayle et al., 2006) introduces newer students to the opportunities to collaborate and contribute while pushing them to expand their competence. Students are encouraged to work in our research groups in Directed Research courses, assisting faculty and psychology seniors on their own projects. This model affords students an insider’s view of the research process before their senior capstone year. At each level across the college years, the emphasis is on both the writing and the obligations of group membership. They are expected to go out of their “comfort zones” to meet the demands of the project. Accountability is enforced by social norms and faculty feedback (Directed Research is a graded course). Sophomores and juniors are aware that they are auditioning for the chance to work with faculty in their senior year and also assess their fit with the social norms and rhythms of the research lab they join. Using the metaphor of musical expertise, competencies are developed from learning the scales to improvisations, reflecting a macro developmental model within Directed Research across the curriculum.

Scales

Sophomores work in a research team (coding; data entry). They participate in the search for research articles in the development of theory and methods. As a research group member, the sophomore might be assigned tasks of library research and maintaining the APA-formatted annotated bibliography.

Les Études

The junior would be assigned tasks of writing up narratives, coding schemes, or procedures as part of the method section of a research paper while assisting in the collection of data. After participating in a research group, juniors formulate their focus and ideas for their own research. They apply to work on their senior project with the faculty member in the spring of their junior year. They begin to choose their own measures and methods or may expand upon or reanalyze data from a professor’s own research.

Improvisations

The seniors work closely with the faculty in the development of the literature review, selection of instruments, and design of the study producing a fully developed research proposal in the fall and a completed paper in the spring. While writing their senior thesis papers, advanced students also compose abstracts and symposium proposals for conferences.

As described above, across all college years, students are evaluated on their writing skills. Students can enroll in one research group over several semesters or can apply and participate in different research groups across their years in the department. This builds their exposure within a small but methodologically diverse department. The curriculum is not just writing and research, it is socialization into the major through peer influence. They learn to become part of the orchestra.

It will take you at least a decade to achieve expertise, and you will need to invest that time wisely, by engaging in “deliberate” practice—practice that focuses on tasks beyond your current level of competence and comfort. You will need a well-informed coach not only to guide you through deliberate practice but also help you learn to coach yourself. (Ericsson, Prietula, & Cokely, 2007, p. 115)

Students’ research group experiences allow them to observe the genesis of research (including its frequent interruptions and revisions) at various levels of competence. As seniors they learn how to explain their concepts, hypotheses, and methods to the other members of the research group. They assign tasks to junior members of the group and they monitor the work of those members. The faculty member’s focus is on providing constant feedback building to the finale: oral presentations at the all-school “Senior Projects Day” and the preparation of a poster paper for presentation at their professional conference (which historically have occurred within the same month). In the spirit of docendo discitur, this model develops the seniors’ expertise by having them mentor other students while being mentored by faculty themselves.

Building Blocks Within the Thesis Capstone Writing Assignment

The senior thesis capstone experience focuses on developing the student’s professional skills as a researcher and writer. Using Dunn’s (2011) concept of a “trick draft,” students complete their work in phases, reflecting micro development within the assignment. In the trick draft, they are given a preformatted manuscript of the traditional components of the typical APA-formatted manuscript (e.g., Introduction, Method, Results, etc.). During the course of the year-long thesis capstone experience, they complete each section of the manuscript in phases. Each phase is submitted for evaluation, grading, and revision. This approach provides constant feedback to the student as well as a convenient paper trail for the professor to assess the development of the student’s writing skill, ability to choose appropriate measures, and state hypothesized relationships among variables.

In the first semester, students are also expected to submit their proposal for research to the Institutional Review Board (IRB; Human Subjects) for evaluation and approval using the template required by the IRB. This requirement also provides our students with feedback on their writing, clarity of assertions, and validity of their proposed research design from professionals outside of psychology. In addition, students begin pilot data collection in this semester, and submit a poster presentation abstract to a peer reviewed conference (i.e., Western Psychological Association, Association for Women in Psychology). This activity develops students’ abilities to analyze their preliminary data and convey emerging findings succinctly.

In the second semester, students begin data collection and analysis. They begin the analysis (quantitative or qualitative) of their findings and construct their results and discussion for a spring presentation at “Senior Projects Day” and at the spring professional conference. These events provide students with additional feedback on their thesis projects from both general and professional audiences.

Finally, students submit their completed manuscript as their final examination paper. Typically, this manuscript is weighted most heavily (e.g., 100 points of 300 points possible) in their overall course grade. This manuscript is expected to incorporate all previous revisions and suggestions.

Evaluation of Research and Writing in the Thesis Capstone

Based on the evidence, the thesis capstone model is effective. Since 1993, more than 234 students in this program submitted their work to peer reviewed conferences and had a 98% acceptance rate of papers, posters, and symposia to those conferences. About 12 seniors presented at conferences each year, in comparison to half this number at an institution where there was no apprenticeship model for research, as is true for one of our coauthors. The results afforded by an apprenticeship model are most achievable in small departments.

In the past 2 years, seniors enrolled in the thesis capstone course completed quantitative and qualitative anonymous online surveys after they graduated. Most rated their experience of the capstone coursework very positively, using a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), see Table 5. Variations in responses to statements about hypothesis testing and interpretation of research findings were likely because some students conducted psychobiography case studies rather than experimental or empirical thesis studies. However, whether students conducted extensive case studies or complex experimental procedures, the majority reported increased confidence in writing a literature review and technical writing skills.

Table 5.

Evaluation of the Capstone Experience.

	M	SD
	(N = 20)
1. Capstone increased my understanding of how to conduct an informative literature review	4.25	0.85
2. My technical writing skills increased as a result of my capstone experience	4.25	0.91
3. Overall, my experience of preparing for and executing my senior thesis project was positive	4.25	1.29
4. Capstone increased my confidence in my ability to conduct research	4.15	1.31
5. I feel professionally prepared because of my senior thesis experience	4.15	0.88
6. Capstone increased my understanding of how theory can be applied to real world problems	4.10	0.97
7. Capstone increased my ability to formulate a testable research question or hypothesis	3.80	1.10
8. Capstone increased my ability to collect analyze, and interpret research findings (whether quantitative or qualitative) (as above)	3.80	1.15

Note. The scale ranged from 1 to 5, where higher scores indicated more positive evaluation.

Students also made clear connections between their experiences as mentors and their overall socialization into psychology. For example, one student noted the following:

Mentoring gave me a small sense of what instructing entails. Working as a research assistant to a faculty member gave me an idea of the degree of work that can sometimes be involved in a mere literature review; in my case, it was a term-long (and virtually fruitless) search.

Most importantly, they understood that in their capstone they were being asked to engage in “deliberate practice” as exemplified by one student’s comment:

Even though it was stressful and a lot of work, I wouldn’t trade the opportunity to do an original capstone project/study. It brought everything I had learned in college together and gave me a taste of what's to come! Capstone is a great opportunity for students.

Faculty model a social climate of collaboration, cohesion, and competence. Evaluations of student performance and student evaluations of the program indicate that this approach to writing and critical thinking skills affords a better experience for students at every level. In the future, departments that use an apprenticeship model for research could embed assessment of each of its components such as literature review, data coding or analysis, and synthesis in discussion sections, across the curriculum, to examine potential developmental gains.

Concluding Thoughts

We believe it is important for students to have the ability to write effectively for a variety of audiences and purposes. An essential skill for psychology students is to be able to employ the discipline’s vernacular and writing style (APA, 2009; Schwartz, Landrum, & Gurung, 2011). Strong effective “writing is a ‘threshold skill’ for both employment and promotion” (College Board, 2004, p. 3). Writing well is essential to getting good grades, getting into graduate school, and publishing scholarship in psychology. Being able to write well is critical to telling the story of psychology (Landrum, 2008) and not surprisingly is emphasized in the APA guidelines for undergraduate psychology (APA, 2007). Equally important as writing professional discipline-based papers is the ability to write clear and effective prose in general (Dunn, Cautin, & Gurung, 2011). Such writing may include composing professional letters, e-mail messages, book reviews, or project proposals, and may be intended for psychologists and nonpsychologists alike.

Accordingly, psychology instructors could require students to write in a variety of forms, including reflective or persuasive essays, book reviews, and blogs, in addition to the more traditional discipline-based papers. Unfortunately, many psychology faculty may not see teaching students how to write well as something falling within their jurisdiction. Faculty often send students who write poorly to campus writing centers with hopes said centers are the silver bullets students need. In this article, we drew attention to some major considerations in regard to writing while also presenting examples of methods we have used to improve student writing.

The sample assignments we described clearly demonstrate an argument for creating developmentally appropriate curricula. The exemplar assignments described here came from three departments, but reflect the ideals for beginner, intermediate, and advanced course goals for writing. The assignments also help students connect writing and reading to their own lives, a critical factor in engaging students. Another factor is key to note: It is important to structure assignments well. Counter to what most students’ probably believe, it is not easy to design effective assignments. The development of meaningful and measurable learning goals is challenging. Instructional designers typically recommend that the assignment design process start with student learning outcomes (SLOs), but in reality, many teachers design their assignments and their courses and implement pedagogical techniques using SLOs as an afterthought—called the “typical approach” by Wiggins and McTighe (1998). So rather than the “afterthought” design, one alternative would be to design the course “backward.” The assignments presented herein each are intricately structured and have been tested to ensure they help students reach the objectives the assignments were designed for.

The preceding sections made four major points. First, many undergraduate programs already utilize a developmental course structure, where students build on the basic concepts introduced in introductory classes in intermediate ones, where they learn content about the subdisciplines of psychology. Then in advanced courses, they become produces of knowledge. We argue for a similar model to be used in the teaching of writing. Writing ability varies developmentally and writing assignments may be more effective if they correspondingly vary according to the level of the class.

Second, our task here was to endorse the developmental curriculum suggested by Dunn et al. (2010) and the developmental writing model proposed by Beins et al. (2010), and provide exemplars of writing assignments that reflect increasing complexity across the undergraduate years. As a starting point, we assessed each of the exemplar assignments individually, in three separate institutions. In addition, we identified components within the assignments that could be embedded in later assignments, in order to evaluate potential developmental gains. Future work is required to evaluate such a developmental model for writing across the psychology undergraduate curriculum.

Third, getting students to increase their interaction with the material is important. Faculty must work to enhance their students’ critical thinking by pushing for more mental work. The assignments and approaches described here illustrate ways to do this whether it is getting students to analyze versus describe (tuning-up) having students evaluate intratext versus intertext (synchrony) or having students practice writing, grade other students, get frustrated, and then explain mistakes (scoring the finale).

Finally, we underscored the place of writing in the work of psychologically literate students. McGovern et al. (2010) identified five general SLOs that represent skills that characterize psychologically literate students (and citizens): writing, speaking, research, collaboration, and information and technological literacy. The assignments presented herein allow each student to take significant leaps toward the goal of psychological literacy and the developmental framework shines much needed light on an often neglected area of course design. The examples above suggest ways to assess potential developmental gains across the curriculum by embedding the early skill set within the rubrics of the later assignments nicely showing a progression from the micro to the macro level. Together, the assignments and developmental focus hold promise for instructors working hard to improve student writing.

Footnotes

Authors’ Notes

Andrea L. Dottolo is now at the Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts, Lowell, and the Women’s Studies Research Center, Brandeis University. This article is based on a collection of papers that the authors presented at a symposium sponsored by the Society for the Teaching of Psychology at the American Psychological Association annual convention in August 2010.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf

American Psychological Association. (2008). Teaching, learning, and assessing in a developmentally coherent curriculum. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, Board of Educational Affairs. Retrieved from www.apa.org/ed/resources.html

American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Baumrind

(1964). Some thoughts on the ethics of research: After reading Milgram’s ‘Behavioral Study of Obedience.’ American Psychologist, 19, 421–423. doi:10.1037/h0040128

Beers

S. E.

(1985). Use of a portfolio writing assignment in a course on developmental psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 12, 94–96. doi:10.1207/s15328023top1202_11

Beins

B. C.

Smith

R. A.

Dunn

D. S.

(2010). Writing for psychology majors as a developmental process. In Dunn

D. S.

Beins

B. C.

McCarthy

M. A.

Hill,

G. W.

IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 253–278). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Berger

(1998/1977). Ways of seeing (excerpt). In Peach

L. J.

(Ed.), Women in culture: A women’s studies anthology (pp. 97–105). Oxford, England: Blackwell.

Cathey

(2007). Power of peer review: An online collaborative learning assignment in social psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 97–99. doi:10.1080/00986280701291325

College Board. (2004). Writing: A ticket to work … or a ticket out. A survey of business leaders. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_down-loads/writingcom/writing-ticket-to-work.pdf

10.

Cerdán

Vidal-Abarca

(2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 209–222. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.209

11.

Drabick

D. A. G.

Weisberg

Paul

Bubier

J. L.

(2007). Keeping it short and sweet: Brief, ungraded assignments facilitate learning. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 172–176. doi:10.1080/00986280701498558

12.

Dunn

D. S.

(2011). A short guide to writing about psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Longman.

13.

Dunn

D. S.

Brewer

C. L.

Cautin

R. L.

Gurung

R. A.

Keith

K. D.

McGregor

L. N.,

… Voight,

M. J.

(2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: Call for a core. In Halpern

D. F.

(Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: A blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47–61). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/12063-003

14.

Dunn

D. S

Cautin

Gurung

R. A. R.

(2011). Curriculum matters: Structure, content, and psychological literacy. In Craney

Dunn

D. S.

(Eds.), Educating the psychologically literate citizen: Global perspectives (pp. 15–26). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

15.

Eble

K. E.

(1976). The craft of teaching: A guide to mastering the professor’s art. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

16.

Ericsson

Prietula

M. J.

Cokely

E. T.

(2007). The making of an expert [Electronic version]. Harvard Business Review, 85, 114–121.

17.

Gurung

R. A. R.

Ansburg

P. I.

Alexander

P. A.

Lawrence

N. K.

Johnson

D. E.

(2008). Scholarship of teaching and learning strategies and tactics: The state of the scholarship of teaching and learning in Psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 249–261. doi:10.1080/00986280802374203

18.

Gurung

R. A. R.

Wilson-Doenges

(2010). Engaging students in psychology: Building on first-year programs and seminars. In Dunn

D. S.

Beins

B. C.

McCarthy

M. A.

Hill,

G. W.

IV (Eds.), Best practices for beginnings and endings in the psychology major (pp. 93–106). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

19.

Halonen

J. S.

Bosack

Clay

McCarthy

(with Dunn

D. S.

Hill

G. W.

IV McEntarfer

Mehrotra

Nesmith

Weaver

Whitlock

) (2003). A rubric for learning, teaching, and assessing scientific reasoning in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 196–208. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP3003_01

20.

Halpern

D. F.

Anton

Beins

B. C.

Bernstein

D. J.

Blair-Broeker

C. T.

Brewer

C.,

… Rocheleau,

C. A.

(2010). Principles for quality undergraduate education in psychology. In Halpern

D. F.

(Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: A blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 161–173). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/a0025181

21.

Higginbotham

(2008/1996). Teen mags: How to get a guy, drop 20 pounds, and lose your self-esteem. In Kesselman

McNair

L. D.

Schniedewind

(Eds.), Women, images and realities: A multicultural anthology (pp. 93–96). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

22.

Jhally

(Producer & Director). (2000). Killing us softly 3: Advertising’s images of women with Jean Kilbourne [Film]. Northampton: MA: Media Education Foundation.

23.

Jhally

(Writer, Narrator, & Editor). (2007). Dreamworlds 3: Desire, sex & power in music video [Film]. Northampton: MA: Media Education Foundation.

24.

Landrum

R. E.

(2008). Undergraduate writing in psychology: Learning to tell the scientific story. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

25.

Lips

(2006). A new psychology of women: Gender, culture and ethnicity (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

26.

McGovern

T. V.

Corey

Cranney

Dixon

W. E.

Jr. Holmes

J. D.

Kuebli

J. E.,

… Walker

S. J.

(2010). Psychologically literate citizens. In Halpern

D. F.

(Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: A blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 9–27). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/12063-001

27.

McGovern

T. V.

Hogshead

D. L.

(1990). Learning about writing, thinking about teaching. Teaching of Psychology, 17, 5–10. doi:10.1207/s15328023top1701_1

28.

Milgram

(1964). Issues in the study of obedience: A reply to Baumrind. American Psychologist, 19, 448–452. doi:10.1037/h0044954

29.

Procidano

M. E.

(1991). Students’ evaluation of writing assignments in an abnormal psychology course. Teaching of Psychology, 18, 164–167. doi:10.1207/s15328023top1803_8

30.

Rayle

A. D.

Bordes

Zapata

Arrendondo

Rutter

Howard

(2006, May). Mentoring experiences of women in graduate education: Factors that matter. Current Issues in Education, 9. Retrieved from http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume9/number6/

31.

Schwartz

Landrum

R. E.

Gurung

R. A. R.

(2011). An easy guide to APA style and format. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

32.

Stewart

T. L.

Myers

A. C.

Culley

M. R.

(2010). Enhanced retention and learning through “writing to learn” in the psychology classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 46–49. doi:10.1080/00986280903425813

33.

Wiggins

McTighe

(1998). Understanding by design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.