Short Summary essay

Teaching Beyond the Bounds: An InterdisciplinaryIntroduction to Psychology and Sociology
Sabina C. Widner and Kimberly A. Davies Augusta State University
We describe the development and evolution of an interdis- ciplinary introductory course in psychology and
sociology. Such a course benefits students by encouraging a wider view of the social sciences and
interdisciplinary critical thinking. The challenges of a combined course include reduced con- tent for each
discipline, the selection of appropriate texts, and the negotiation of course processes between two profes- sors.
Course evaluations indicated that students appreciated thinking beyond the bounds of 1 discipline. Additionally,
statistical analyses suggested that our students received sim- ilar grades in upper level psychology courses as a
cohort of psychology majors who completed the traditional introduc- tion to psychology course.
Psychology and sociology are disciplines within the social sciences that focus on many of the same phenomena. Both seem ideally suited for combined courses and shared research endeavors. Although interdisciplinary
and team-taught courses are increasing (Davis, 1995; Dowds, 1998), our literature and Internet searches revealed no other combined introduction to psychology and sociology courses. Obtaining a wider view of re- lated
disciplines would seem desirable for a liberal arts education, and combined courses may be practical on college
campuses with limited resources.
We began teaching an interdisciplinary introduc- tory course in psychology and sociology to help foster ties
between our departments and allow students to compare the fields in an organized and critical manner. We have
offered the interdisciplinary course five times as part of our regular core curriculum or as an honors course
without appreciable difference in course content or student expectations. Successful completion of the course
allows students to enroll in upper level courses in both disciplines.
Organization of the Course
Course goals included (a) providing an overview and comparison of psychology and sociology, (b) encouraging critical thinking, and (c) applying sociological and psychological principles to understanding individuals and
their environment. To gauge students’ progress to- ward these goals, we assessed their performance on ex- ams,
written thought assignments, and group research projects. Students actively engaged in a comparison of
sociology and psychology and the methods used in each field. Both instructors attended all class meetings and
fostered discussion on the similarities and differences between each discipline on the day’s topic. Often, we
approached the same topic from an individual perspec- tive versus a macro or societal viewpoint. For instance,
we discussed the psychological theories related to de- pression (e.g., an individual’s learning history) along with
the sociological theory of structural functionalism that individuals with depression may serve a functional
purpose in society. During the psychology lecture on intelligence, we addressed the biological theories of intelligence as well as the social factors that may affect the definition and measurement of intelligence. We
complemented the symbolic interaction perspective in sociology with a discussion on the linguistic relativity
hypothesis covered in many introductory psychology texts. We also conducted a nature versus nurture de- bate
on a topic such as personality. For each class day, one instructor had primary responsibility for the lecture
material.
Because it is impossible to combine material from two full-length courses into a single course, we care- fully
considered which concepts were most important to cover at the introductory level. For psychology, the topics
included (a) how psychology is distinct in its content and history from other disciplines, (b) research methods,
(c) the biological perspective, (d) the behav- ioral perspective, (e) personality theories, (f) mem- ory, (g)
intelligence, (h) abnormal psychology, and (i) social psychology. For sociology, the topics included (a) how
sociology is distinct in its content and his- tory from other disciplines; (b) research methods; (c) the conflict,
symbolic interaction, and structural func- tionalist perspectives; (d) socialization; (e) race and
118 Te aching of Psychology
findings stratification; (f) nature versus nurture issues; and (g)
from psychological and sociological perspec- norms and deviance.
tives. Topics have included helping behavior and psy- The class met twice a week for 75 min. With 30
chology and sociology in the media. Most recently, class meetings, we devoted one to two lectures to each
student groups studied sociological and psychological topic area listed previously. Additionally, we dedicated
aspects of family, friends, traditions, and superstitions two class days to student project work. Exams were a
in the area’s Jewish community. combination of essay and multiple-choice questions.
Text Materials
Evaluation
Selecting texts proved to be a challenge. We deBenefits
cided not to select a standard introductory text in each discipline due to cost. A number of readers on sociological topics were readily available, but we found no corresponding reader in introductory psychology. For
the first and second classes, we created a textbook through a text publisher with research articles in each
discipline. Unfortunately, the limited choice of arti- cles hindered the teaching of basic concepts in each
discipline. The next two times we taught the course, we chose separate readers for each discipline. The psychology text was Forty Studies That Changed Psychology (Hock, 2002) and the sociology text wasTen
Questions: A Sociological Perspective (Charon, 2004). Once again, we found that students had difficulty with
some of the basic psychology concepts. For the most recent course, we selected an introductory text in
psychology (Coon, 2003) custom published to include only the chapters we needed and the Charon reader. This
option appears to offer an adequate solution as evidenced by students’
Course ratings have been uniformly high, on a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)to5(strongly agree), for
the items, “As a result of taking this course, I feel more knowledgeable in this field” (M = 4.6, SD = .58) and
“This course has challenged me to think” (M = 4.44, SD = .53). Students generally have noted the positive
aspects of integrating related disciplines. As two students stated, “Studying the two sciences at once allows
students to have a broader understanding of why humans are the way they are,” and “I learned better analytical
thinking, open mindedness, and accepting different perspectives.”
Personally, we believe we have gained a clearer understanding of each discipline’s value and an ap- preciation
of their differences. Watching each other teach has also promoted our pedagogical growth. For instance, we
learned classroom technology skills and classroom management techniques from each other.
increased scores on exam items related to psychology concepts (i.e., the mean for the psychology items out
Challenges of 100 points with the previous text was 82.99, and for the Coon text it was 86.48), t(56) = 2.33, p
< .05. We believe that our greatest challenges are the cov- erage of material in each discipline and the difficulty of comparable text materials for each subject. Using Project Experiences t test analyses, we recently compared our students (n = 53) to graduating psychology majors with tra- ditional introductory psychology course preparations In each course, we assigned a project designed to (n = 50) in terms of their grade-point averages in up- allow students to think critically about similarities and per level psychology courses and found no significant differences between psychology and sociology. In two difference between groups, t(101) = .89, p > . 05, of the courses, the project involved reading books such
M = 2.53 and M = 2.38, respectively. Additionally, as There Are No Children Here: The Story of Two Boys
we computed correlations between students’ introduc- Growing Up in the Other America (Kotlowitz, 1992)
and
tory grades and their grades in upper level psychology Girl Interrupted (Kaysen, 1993). Students wrote papers
courses for our students (r = .66) and for traditional comparing and contrasting the psychological and soci-
psychology students (r =.51). A Fisher’sz test revealed ological theories in the books. On three occasions, stuno significant difference between the correlation coef- dents completed group research projects of their own
ficients. These analyses suggest that our students are design for which they presented posters and discussed
as prepared as students who completed a traditional
Vol. 34, No. 2, 2007 119
introductory psychology course to take upper level courses in psychology. Summary
We originally developed this introductory course to promote closer ties between our disciplines and offer
students the opportunity to compare psychology and sociology in a critical and organized way. We believe the
advantages of an integrated introductory course outweigh the disadvantages of decreased course con- tent.
Student feedback indicates that students appre- ciate thinking beyond the bounds of one discipline, and statistical
analyses suggest students are prepared for upper level psychology courses.
References
Charon, J. M. (2004). Ten questions: A sociological perspective (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Coon, D. (2003). Essentials of psychology: Explorations and application (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson
Learning. Davis, J. R. (1995). Interdisciplinary courses and team teaching: New arrangements for learning. Westport,
CT: American Council on Education/Oryx Press. Dowds, B. N. (1998). Helping students make connections across
disciplines. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 55–60. Hock, R. R. (2002). Forty studies that changed psychology:
Explorations into the history of psychological research (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kaysen, S.
(1993). Girl, interrupted. New York: Turtle Bay. Kotlowitz, A. (1992). There are no children here: The story of two boys
growing up in the other America. New York: Anchor.
Notes
1. The course syllabus and all assignments are available on
request from the first author. 2. Send correspondence to Sabina C. Widner, Department of Psychology, 2500 Walton Way,
Augusta State Uni- versity, Augusta, GA 30904; e-mail: swidner@aug.edu.
120 Te aching of Psychology
Copyright of Teaching of Psychology is the property of
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.