Accountability pressures influence all levels of psychology instruction. In this article we explore how to meet those pressures with integrity, focusing on authentic assessment and teaching as a primary solution. We propose a rubric to describe the progress of students' acquisition of scientific inquiry skills applied to behavior and provide an example of an authentic assessment that demonstrates use of the rubric. Application of the rubric can enhance active learning, promote more sophisticated scientific inquiry, improve metacognitive development, support program evaluation, and enrich faculty development.

Performance benchmarks are proposed to assist undergraduate psychology programs in defining their missions and goals as well as documenting their effectiveness. Experienced academic program reviewers compared their experiences to formulate a developmental framework of attributes of undergraduate programs focusing on activity in 8 domains: curriculum, assessment issues, student learning outcomes, program resources, student development, faculty characteristics, program climate, and administrative support. A continuum of performance was conceptualized for each attribute in each of the domains to characterize underdeveloped, developing, effective, and distinguished achievement for undergraduate programs. The authors hope to inspire a national conversation about program benchmarks in psychology in order to improve program quality, encourage more effective program reviews, and help optimally functioning programs compete more successfully for resources on the basis of their distinguished achievements.[A]lthough outcomes assessment and educational standards can aid in improving quality, in isolation they will fail. To succeed, they must be part of an integrated strategy with a heavy emphasis on the use of formative assessment for both teacher and learner.

Nornrrss. Honrrcks, and Stevenson (1989) found that faculty in higher edrrcatiirn hud mixed attitudes ~(rncernin~ the lac of extra credit. In this article, u~e present our study ofpsychology farulfy u~ho rated each rrf 39 extra-nedit ol~portunities on three dimensirm: their use rrf the item, its educutirm~ vulue, and the likelihard rhat all sttulents uould be able m armplete the oplmrtrcnit? (access). Appmximately 82% of respondents r~pmted usincextra nedit. Sipificunt positive correlution~ wne obruined between rated educatrrmul talue and use of extra nedit, as well as mtings for use and access. The pmentace of reportal use in our study sugesrs thut psycho lo^). faculry are likel? to rcse extra nedit.Alrhou~h opinions cuncerning the use of extra nedit varied dramu tic all^, ihc most communly used extra-nedit opportunities wne those rated to haw the highest edricational value.

No abstract

The p u r p o s e of t h e s t u d i e s was t o d e v e l o p i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t how t h e g e n e r a l p u b l i c p e r c e i v e s t h e d e g r e e o f d a n g e r r e p r e s e n t e d by s i g n a l words i n warnings. Although many o r g a n i z a t i o n s have g u i d e l i n e s f o r t h e d e t e r m in a t i o n of what s i g n a l words are t o be used w i t h s p e c i f i c h a z a r d s , t h e s e a r e u s u a l l y unknown t o t h e p u b l i c . For 1 5 i t e m s t h a t had been r a t e d f o r t h e s e r i o u s n e s s of r i s k , 288 s u b j e c t s were a s k e d t o i n d i c a t e which s i g n a l word t h e y would u s e t o inform o t h e r s o f t h e h a z a r d . S i g n a l words t h a t had been found t o r a t e h i g h i n s e r i o u s n e s s by Leonard, Karnes, and S c h n e i d e r (1988) tended t o b e used more w i t h i t e m s r a t e d a s h i g h e r r i s k s . D i f f e re n c e s were found among a g e g r o u p s w i t h o l d e r s u b j e c t s u s i n g s i g n a l words t h a t c a r r i e d more s e r i o u s c o n n o t a t i o n s . The p o s s i b l e w a r n i n g s t h a t might b e used were d i s c u s s e d . The p u r p o s e of t h e s e s t u d i e s i s t o examine p o p u l a t i o n v a l u e s t h a t m i g h t b e used i n t h e development o f classes o f warnings. Although i t i s w i d e l y a g r e e d t h a t w a r n i n g s work i n a v a r i e t y o f c i rc u m s t a n c e s , t h e y v a r y i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s . Wogalter , Godfrey, F o n t e n e l l e , Desauln i e r s , R o t h s t e i n , ti Laughery (1987) have l i s t e d a common set of c r i t e r i a f o r t h e c o n t e n t of warnings. The c r i t e r i a are: 1) a s i g n a l word; 2 ) a h a z a r d d e s c r i pt i o n ; 3 ) a s t a t e m e n t of c o n s e q u e n c e s ; and 4 ) i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r h a z a r d avoidance. W o g a l t e r , e t a l . (1987) f u r t h e r n o t e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f d u r a b i l i t y and a b i l it y t o a t t r a c t a t t e n t i o n a s w e l l a s t h e c o g n i t i v e a s p e c t s o f c o n c i s e n e s s and c o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t y a s f a c t o r s i n producing a p p r o p r i a t e r e s p o n s e s t o w a r n i n g s . The s i g n a l word i s a n i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e o f a warning b e c a u s e i t s e r v e s a s a c o n c i s e a t t e n t i o n -g e t t i n g d e v i c e . A l t h o u g h t h e s i g n a l word d o e s n o t b y i t s e l f e x p l a i n what t h e problem i s , i t c a n b y i t s e l f a l e r t t h e o b s e r v e r t o beware of a h a z a r d o u s s i t u a t i o n . Furt h e r , i t seems r e a s o n a b l e t o a s s u m e t h a t a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n may b e conveyed by t h e s e l e c t i o n o f a n a p p r o p r i a t e s i g n a l w o r d . L e o n a r d , K a r n e s , a n d S c h n e i d e r (1988) d e t e r m i n e d s c a l e v a l u e s f ...