Ethnic diversity and curriculum.

Abstract

When thinking and planning for the inclusion of ethnic minorities in professional psychology, one must include ethnic minority issues in the curriculum. Both chapters in this part stress such inclusion and provide the rationale for it. They cite a moral imperative, especially in light of the changing demographics of the United States. Tracing the history of organized psychology's attention to issues of diversity, they point out the lag between that first attention and any action. This lack of action can be attributed in part to the perpetuation of two myths that I discuss in chapter 18, "Incorporating Ethnic Minority Issues into the Curriculum: Myths and Realities." In chapter 19, "Ethnic and Cultural Diversity and the Professional Psychology Training Curriculum," Troy points out that, given a favorable political environment, now is the time to include ethnic minority issues into the curriculum.In chapter 19, Troy raises two important issues. These are the centrality of diversity and its universality of exposure, or the extent to which diversity "is truly viewed as an issue for all." Although he does not explore these issues in depth, he points out two problems that can occur. First, cultural diversity might well be centrally treated, but trivially so with respect to the majority culture. Second, exposure to issues of diversity may be required of all students, but the focus is at the periphery.Although I state it differently, I consider these problems in my discussion of the disadvantages of the area-of-concentration and the separate-course models. Whereas the area-of-concentration model makes central the issues of diversity, its inaccessibility to large numbers of the majority culture leaves the majority culture virtually untouched, primarily because it is the converts (ethnic minorities) who choose these areas of proficiency. The separate-course model, although universally exposed by being required for all students, treats diversity at the periphery.Troy proposes "conceptualizing the curricular building blocks as discrete competencies" as a way of removing the threat to diversity being dealt with centrally, whereas "invoking a notion of the core curriculum as the aggregate of sets of formal competencies for the professional entry level" reduces the threat to the universality of diversity. If all courses of the core curriculum are structured according to the integration model discussed in chapter 18, the effect anticipated by Troy will occur; 169

Making a case for training in ethnic and cultural diversity in increasing treatment efficacy.

“…Several training models have emphasized the curricular format by which ethnic and cross-cultural training can be incorporated into an existing programs (Copeland, 1982; Davis-Russell, 1990; Lefley, 1985b; Margolis & Rungta, 1986; Troy, 1990). For example, Copeland (1982) has identified four basic training models: (a) separate course, (b) area of concentration, (c) interdisciplinary, and (d) integration.…”