Scholarly writings provide guidance for delivery of an undergraduate program in psychology (e.g., APA, 2007;Halpern, 2010). Much of the emphasis in this literature has been on examination of the curriculum (e.g., McGovern, 1993;Stoloff et al., 2010), yet minimal research has been conducted to empirically link the overall undergraduate psychology major experience with outcomes. This article relates program characteristics (including curriculum, resources, and faculty engagement) to student success and satisfaction among students completing psychology major programs at 110 institutions in North America. It provides evidence that important factors that correlate with student success are an institutional focus on undergraduates, frequent experiential learning, and faculty engagement outside of the classroom. Students are more satisfied with programs in which they have more laboratory experiences and where they interact with faculty at student events. Adequate staffing of the psychology major program is important; beneficial activities may suffer when faculty are overwhelmed with too many students or competing obligations.Keywords undergraduate psychology curriculum, student satisfaction, experiential learning, faculty engagement Are the experiences that faculty provide to psychology majors leading to successful and satisfied students? If so, which experiences are the most valuable? Scholars of our profession have discussed best-practices recommendations for the undergraduate psychology major for some time. Buxton et al. (1952), along with McKeachie and Milholland (1961), suggested that any psychology degree should begin with an introductory course and should contain a common core of content courses from the subdisciplines and courses that are applied in nature. Brewer et al. (1993) maintained that the undergraduate degree in psychology is fundamentally a liberal arts degree with an emphasis on psychology as a scientific discipline. Courses should be sequenced to promote critical thinking and scientific understanding of the discipline and to sequentially move students from elementary to advanced topics. Brewer and colleagues specified that the curriculum should include an introductory course, a methodology course, and content courses, and it should conclude with an integrative capstone experience.Two recent documents offer additional support for psychology as a liberal arts degree that is grounded in the scientific foundations of the discipline, but they go further by suggesting that programs include active and experiential learning; develop co-curricular activities, such as advising, that enhance student learning; and have high expectations for student performance. The APA Guidelines for the Undergraduate Psychology Major (American Psychological Association [APA], 2007) provides general guidance for quality programs in undergraduate psychology. Unlike previous documents, the Guidelines are less focused on what students should do during the major and more focused on what students should achieve as a result of completi...

No abstract

This study presents a revision of Trice's (1985) Academic Locus of Control Scale for College Students. A principal component analysis involving 322 college students produced four factors including 21 of the original 28 items. Inspection of the seven items not included in the four-factor solution suggested that they could be eliminated on both content and technical grounds. The resulting revised scale was similar to the original scale with respect to its relations with GPA, attendance, and measures of Academic Entitlement, procrastination, depression, and anxiety.

Partnership models have been effective across many areas of higher education such as involving students as teaching and learning consultants, in course design and redesign, and as co-instructors. However, there are few systems-level (i.e., entire programs or institutions) examples of partnership work and virtually none in systems-level assessment. Systems-level assessment models, such as program-level assessment in the United States, are used to inform broad changes to academic programs. Thus, student input may be crucial. This study sought to explore the broad factors that underlie potential student-faculty partnership efforts in systems-level assessment. Participants were faculty and staff members based in the United States and the United Kingdom who engaged in student-faculty partnerships at the program and/or classroom level. Qualitative coding and analyses of interviews with participants resulted in seven primary themes. This study examines patterns evident in student-faculty partnership work across several areas of higher education and begins to lay the foundation for a theory of student-faculty partnership in systems-level assessment.

No abstract