Analysis of responses from 20 chairmen of Departments of Psychology in liberal arts colleges indicated the schools fall into three groups: pure liberal arts program, radically changing program, and one integrated program in which bounds of departments are eliminated.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychological Association: Committee on the Teaching of Psychology.Report of the Committee of the A.P.A. on the teaching of psychology, presented to the association, December 29, 1909. Lancaster, Pa.: Review Publishing Co., 1910.
2.
A.P.A.Education and Training Board, Committee on Undergraduate Education. Amer. Psychologist, 1957, 12, 18–19.
3.
ArnheimR.Second thoughts of a psychologist. In TaylorH. (Ed.), Essays in teaching. New York: Harper, 1950. Pp. 77–95.
4.
BarzunJ.The house of intellect. New York: Harper, 1959.
5.
BuxtonC. E.College teaching: a psychologist's view. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1956.
6.
General education in school and college: a committee report by members of the faculties of Andover, Exeter, Lawrenceville, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale. Cambridge: Harvard Univer. Press, 1953.
7.
GustavA.Field work in the undergraduate psychology curriculum. J. Psychol., 1959, 47, 99–105.
8.
Harvard University Commission to Advise on the Future of Psychology at Harvard.The place of psychology in an ideal university. Cambridge: Harvard Univer. Press, 1947.
9.
HookS.Perennial and temporal goals in education. J. high. Educ., 1952, 23, 1–12.
10.
KrutchJ. W.The measure of man. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1953.
11.
LichtensteinP. E.Perspectives in psychology: XIV. Psychology in the liberal arts curriculum. Psychol. Rec., 1960, 10, 131–139.
12.
SpenglerO.The decline of the West. New York: Knopf, 1939.
13.
Sub-committee on Curriculum Differences Undergraduate training for psychologists.Amer. Psychologist, 1958, 13, 585–588.
