Category Archives: Psychology

June 9, 2009 · 2:17 pm

Grade inflation?


My latest edition of the APA Monitor on Psychology has a little stat from www.gradeinflation.com that might interest you. Check out the extensive information at this site. Among other things are the findings that grade inflation began to be evident in the 1960s but really took of in the 1980s and hasn’t stopped.

In the 1930s, the average GPA at American colleges and universities was about 2.35, a number that corresponds with data compiled by W. Perry in 1943. By the 1950s, the average GPA was about 2.52. GPAs took off in the 1960s with grades at private schools rising faster than public schools, lulled in the 1970s, and began to rise again in the 1980s at a rate of about 0.10 to 0.15 increase in GPA per decade. The grade inflation that began in the 1980s has yet to end.

Further, private (and more expensive) schools seem to have much higher inflation in grades that in public schools. The author suggests that the reason is likely the result of the consumer mentality of education these days–you pay a lot for a degree, you want the reward of a good grade.

The author believes that the resurgence of grade inflation in the 1980s principally was caused by the emergence of a consumer-based culture in higher education. Students are paying more for a product every year, and increasingly they want and get the reward of a good grade for their purchase. In this culture, professors are not only compelled to grade easier, but also to water down course content. Both intellectual rigor and grading standards have weakened. The evidence for this is not merely anecdotal. Students are highly disengaged from learning, are studying less than ever, and are less literate. Yet grades continue to rise. (emphasis mine)

According to the author, schools with lax selection standards and community colleges (who probably accept most everyone with a high school diploma or GED) seem to have a much lower grade inflation rate. Why? There isn’t pressure on the profs to give great grades.

Other factors involved?

1. Not denying the author’s findings but we should remember that prestigious schools (with larger rejection rates) do not have a normal distributions of students. Most are high quality. It becomes harder and harder to determine the quality of the very very good from the really good. When there is confusion there will always be pressure to get as much as you can for your work as a student.

2. The philosophy of “everyone wins” is pervasive. Every kid gets a medal for trying at their sport. Every college kid gets an A for trying. I can’t deny that this idea exists.

3. Frankly, education is something to be consumed these days. “What can I do with this” is a much more frequent question than it was when I was in grad school in the 1980s. I don’t see as many students just in it for the love of learning. Is that because of the inflation of costs? Consumption driven education (i.e., my program) is concerned about the outcome rather than building the best creative and critical thinkers. If you value outcome over thinking, you have less to separate the genius students from the competent students. Therefore competency is rewarded and grades inflate because more are able to meet the standard of “competent.”

Grade inflation at Biblical?

Absolutely. But not equally across domains. I suspect we counselors give higher grades than do theology profs. Is it because we are soft and want everyone to be happy and like us? No. We have different philosophies. Like number 3 above, theology tends to focus on critical thinking and abstract ideas. As a result, there will be more diversity of grades with the best students getting the highest grades. However, in counseling classes we focus on skills(not to say we don’t want to build and support critical thinking). We tell the students the skills we want to see and if they can exhibit those skills, they get the good grade. In many ways, we have a Pass/Fail approach to grading (or in some of our courses, does not meet expectations, meets, exceeds) with the understanding that most will meet expectations if we have been really clear about our skills focus. The grade signifies they have the skill. Maybe our philosophy indicates that the grading system of A though F doesn’t really help determine who really is the most competent. For example, I can have students get As in their academic courses but not be interpersonally competent. When you choose a counselor, do you really want to pick on the basis of their GPA or on their ability to exhibit the skill of kindness, insight, and trustworthiness?

Leave a comment

Filed under Biblical Seminary, christian psychology, Cultural Anthropology, News and politics, Psychology, teaching counseling

Tagged as , , , ,

June 8, 2009 · 10:01 am

Hooking up less difficult than admitting love?


Listened this am to NPR’s Morning edition and a story on “hooking up.” Definitely worth your listening for the 8 minute story. Here’s a couple of amazing thoughts (not quotes) from female interviewees:

1. The hook-up is all about the tension, build-up, and the sex.

2. Dating actually costs too much money; hook-ups are much cheaper

3. Talking about being in love is more embarrassing than talking about one’s sex life (hooking up) on the radio.

4. Dating a guy means bringing him into your circle of close friends and the preference is to have the hook-up but do nothing that could harm real friendships

5. It is vulnerable to be needy of love. Not so of sex.

Scary stuff here. Think about it. Taking your clothes off and sharing genital sexual activity with an acquaintance puts you in a less vulnerable position than asking someone out for a formal date?  Can someone explain that one to me?

6 Comments

Filed under Cultural Anthropology, news, Psychology, Relationships, Sex, sexuality

Tagged as , , ,

June 3, 2009 · 5:21 am

Enslaved to freedom?


Check out this quote (emphases mine). Will post the author of this tomorrow but I would love your reflections. Can the thirst for freedom become an overlord? A greed? Is it present in American culture today?

“We were a self-centered army without parade or gesture, devoted to freedom, the second of man’s creeds, a purpose so ravenous that it devoured all our strength, a hope so transcendent that our earlier ambitions faded in its glare.

As time went by our need to fight for the ideal increased to an unquestioning possession, riding with spur and rein over our doubts. Willy-nilly it became a faith. We had sold ourselves into its slavery, manacled ourselves together in its chain-gang, bowed ourselves to serve its holiness with all our good and ill content….we had surrendered, not body alone, but soul to the overmastering greed of victory. by our own act we were drained of morality, of volition, of responsibility, like dead leaves in the wind. “

9 Comments

Filed under Cultural Anthropology, Great Quotes, Psychology

Tagged as ,

May 19, 2009 · 10:19 am

Dialog between Christian Psychology and Biblical Counseling


Yesterday Robert Kelleman made a comment on an old blog post of mine about my model of counseling. In that comment he said the following:

Your readers might find of interest my summary of last week’s symposium on biblical counseling where Eric Johnsons (SCP), myself (BCSFN), David Powlison (CCEF), and Steve Viars (NANC, FBCM) discussed with Jeremy Lelek (ABC) the state of biblical counseling/Christian psychology:

http://tinyurl.com/r8kf7r

To me, true biblical counseling and true Christian psychology should be the same thing. They use biblical psychology (understanding people, diagnosing problems, and prescribing solutions) theory to guide their biblical counseling (sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding) practice.

Bob Kellemen

The link takes you to Bob’s own site and has links to christiancounseling.com where DVDs of the dialogue will be available. It is good to hear of the unity among these cousin models of counseling.

2 Comments

Filed under biblical counseling, christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling skills, Psychology

Tagged as , , , ,

May 8, 2009 · 5:17 am

Physiology Phriday: Abuse alters genes?


Check out the following link for some very interesting research on how abuse alters the NR3C1 gene in the hippocampus which functions to limit our stress responses. It appears that when the gene is altered, it inhibits natural control of stress responses thereby leaving the abuse victim on high levels of alert.

This may give new meaning to “the sins of the fathers passed on to the third generation” comment in Scripture.

4 Comments

Filed under Abuse, counseling science, Psychology

Tagged as , ,

May 4, 2009 · 1:26 pm

Practicum Monday: counseling mistakes?


I’d like to compile a list of mistakes mostly likely to be made by novicecounselors. In the past I’ve written on some of the mistakes or foolish behavior of counselors and some of you have helped contribute stories like the counselor who fell asleep during the session, the counselor who ate a meal, who tried to set the counselee up with a son or daughter, the counselor who took phone calls, etc. Most of these mistakes wouldn’t be made by the typical counselor, even one who had never counseled before.

So, what are the most common mistakes of the novice counselor? Not sure, here are some I’ve observed:

1. Failing to collect enough data during the first sessionto assess matters of suicidality or mental status. Novice counselors tend to either drill too deep on one topic (and so miss other important matters) or stay on the surface and fail to ask questions they think might embarrass the client

2. Promising too much. We want the client to have hope and we hope they don’t see us as novice, so we promise the world. Such temptations lead sometimes to offering our phone number to call at all hours, to agreeing to meet outside of sessions, too allowing sessions to go beyond the planned limit.

3. Encouraging. Beginning Christian counselors sometimes fail to let the counselee sit with their pain. Instead, they trot out verses to comfort and encourage. Often, these passages fall flat without their intended result.  

4. Writing too much. Progress notes may look like novellas. When you don’t know what is important, everything is documented.

5. Going along with the parents. Novice counselors often seen kids and their parents. It is easy to become railroaded into allowing the parents to use the session to gang up on the kids. Novice counselors have a hard time managing the parents and the kids in the same session.

What mistakes did you make? Did you experience at the hands of a novice?

When I started, I hated the question about my age (I was 24 but looked younger). I tried all sorts of creative ways to illustrate my experience and to be vague about my actual age. I’m sure I never convinced anyone. They stayed because they didn’t want to start over. I should have just said (nicely), “your right, I’m young. We can either find you another client now or we can try the following intervention and if you don’t like what I’m doing, we can find you someone else then. What would you like to do?”

3 Comments

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, counseling, counseling science, counseling skills, Psychology, teaching counseling

Tagged as , , ,

April 13, 2009 · 11:11 am

Practicum Monday: The secret to a good experience


A new semester begins today and I pick up teaching again after a sabbatical. It feels good to get back in the saddle again. Practicum and Professional Orientation starts today and so my students begin their first fieldwork assignments around the region. If they are at all like I was when I first began counseling work, they will be nervous and worried about doing well and doing the right thing. But I have a secret for them. This nervousness will actually help them do well and, for the most part, mistakes in counseling often turn out to be good for both counselee and client. Counseling is more like art and less like surgery. And since counseling is relational art, the opportunity to “do over” actually provides wonderful realism to the healing.

However, there is another secret to good practicum experiences: good supervision. Good supervision makes or breaks an experience. And good supervision requires the active participation of both supervisor and supervisee.

The Supervisor: Supervisors come with a variety of skills, personality, and style. Some are quite directive and keep a tight rein on your practice attempts. Others are very hands-off, wanting you to try stuff yourself and so they respond to your questions and concerns rather than seek you out. Others are very process oriented and focus on your experience more than what you actually do.

The Supervisee: Some students come with hundreds of questions (some out of curiosity but most out of anxiety). Others want very specific directions and then try to act them out as was given. Others still want to talk about their own experiences and have a harder time recalling client responses.

Practicum students do well to prepare for supervision:

1. Before you begin, have some discussion about how the supervisor likes supervision to go? Do they have an idea about how they want you to function in it? Do they want it to happen just after your counseling experiences for the week so you can debrief? Just before so you can best remember what was decided?

2. When you bring your cases to supervision, come prepared to concisely summarize history, presenting problems, attempts to solve prior to counseling, family systems, current crises if present, work thus far in your counseling. Also, come prepared with a specific objective question you would  like to have answered. The more specific your question, the more likely you will come away with an answer.

3. Be sure to ask the supervisor to help you refine your hypotheses. This is a good opportunity to consider alternative ideas.

4. Schedule time when the supervisor can either watch you live or listen to a taping. There is NO better supervision possible. Scary? Yes. But essential if you do intend to become a good counselor

5. Be willing to ask (nicely) the why question when your supervisor gives you directives that don’t make sense. More than doing the right thing, you want to understand the critical thinking behind the right response.

6. Use your relationship with the supervisor to grow as a professional. This is one of your future colleagues. If there are conflicts between you, practice the good art of resolution. Don’t avoid and don’t attack.

1 Comment

Filed under biblical counseling, christian counseling, christian psychology, counseling science, counseling skills, education, Psychology, teaching counseling

Tagged as , ,

April 10, 2009 · 5:49 am

Psychiatric vs. Psychological evaluations: What is the difference?


In place of my usual physiology Phriday post, I give you this…

“I think I need a psychiatric evaluation? Can you test me?” These are some of the questions I get from time to time. And they reveal an ongoing confusion about testings, assessment, evaluations, the world of psychiatry, psychology, and neurology. Interestingly, if you type in “psychiatric evaluation” into wikipedia, you actually get redirected to an entry on psychological evaluations and testing. So, let me try to differentiate a bit here:

What is a psychiatric evaluation? It is done by a psychiatrist who is a physician with special psychiatry training (courses and residencies). This evaluation is comprehensive but medical in nature. Expect the person to ask for your physical, behavioral, and cognitive histories, order blood tests or other medical exams, evaluate (by observation and interview) your mood, your reality testing, and mental status etc. Ultimately, after an extensive (and usually expensive) interview, the doctor will arrive at a psychiatric diagnosis (if appropriate) and may also recommend medicines to help with the problem–which they can prescribe. A few also provide ongoing talk therapy but most do not. Rather, they recommend you find a therapist for that part. They will follow up with med checks as needed to titrate or refine your medicines. When a person has a very difficult, complex, or lengthy history of mental health, or, when the person is needing a diagnosis for legal reasons, a psychiatrist is a good choice. They are usually gifted at extracting subtle physical and behavioral matters that may help correctly pinpoint the problem. While a person might well get anti-depressants from their regular doctor, a good psychiatrist is better able to deal with complex matters and follow you more closely to get the right compound and dosage.

Neurological Evaluation. Stating the obvious, a physician with neurological specialties and qualifications does a neurological evaluation. Neurologists specialize in…wait for it…the nervous system (brain, spinal cord, and 12 cranial nerves). A neurological evaluation includes many of the things evaluated by psychiatrists but with special attention to your motor and sensory systems, your reflexes, and similar kinds of things. You might more likely see a neurologist when you obviously have a neurological issue. Neurologists are more likely to specialize in ADHD, brain injuries, and psychiatric problems that result from dementias or other known physical problems. They are often better able to give and interpret MRIs and other imaging that might be appropriate. They will also prescribe and follow medications.

Psychological Evaluation, AKA testing, psych assessment. These are offered, mostly, by doctoral level psychologists. These evaluations will cover much of the same history, mental status, and provide diagnoses when appropriate. Interviews, just like the previous two options, are essential. However, what sets psychological evaluation apart is its use of standardized tests. These may be paper and pencil or electronic. They may be filled out by the client or by family members. The results provide a snapshot of behavior, or cognitive functioning, or mood by contrasting the individual results against a peer group. For example, a child may complete a computerized test to assess attention span. The results are compared to thousands of children taking this test who either are “non ADHD” and or ADHD. A good psychologist collects data from multiple data points (test data, interviews by client and maybe family, observations, etc.) and uses that data to make interpretations and recommendations for ongoing care. Usually, the best psychological evaluations begin with a very objective, specific question. Just throwing a bunch of tests at a person to “see what comes up” isn’t all that helpful. Just because something pops up doesn’t mean it is meaningful.

It is true that masters level therapists (licensed or not) give and interpret some tests. But most of the best tests can only be given and interpreted by doctoral level, licensed psychologists.

There are other types of evaluations. Neuropsychologists are doctoral psychologists with specialized training and help pinpoint brain injury, unravel more complex learning disabilities, etc. Neuropsychiatric evaluations are done by another similar but slightly different professional. You can check out their interesting history on this wikipedia page.

So, how do you choose what is best for you? Answer a few questions.

1. What do I really want to know when it is all said and done? What might help me decide how to proceed? The more specific you are, the more likely you can get the answer you want.

2. Do I think I need to focus more on physical options or behavioral options?

3. Do I think I’m likely to need medications? The physician types are better. Psychologists cannot prescribe meds (unless you live in Hawaii or are in the military).

4. If I am given a diagnosis, what do I need it for? Both doctoral level psychologists and psychiatrists are capable of giving you diagnoses. However, some people or systems value one opinion over another. Figure out if it matters for your purposes.

5. Am I looking for specific behavioral/relational suggestions? Then psychological evaluations are more appropriate.

6. Am I looking to form an ongoing therapeutic talk based relationship? See the psychologist.

17 Comments

Filed under counseling, counseling science, Psychiatric Medications, Psychology, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , ,

April 3, 2009 · 5:53 am

Physiology Phriday: Your brain and your food


We all love certain kinds of foods and when we eat them, our pleasure quotients increase dramatically. Some recent work in brain imaging suggests that women with propensity for bulimia show “greater activation of key reward regions of the brain” after tasting a chocolate milkshake. These same individuals may also experience decreased activity in parts of the brain that control self-regulation and impulse control (as reported in the April 2009 Monitor on Psychology, pp. 48-49).

This area of research is new and so the results need replication plus interpretation. Does the brain function this way after years of bulimic behavior. Or, does the brain instigate or tempt such behavior (strong reward response plus increased impulsivity) with it’s prior functioning?

Of course, the individual struggling with bulimia cares only a little about the why. They really concern themselves with the what. How do I eat with moderation? How do I not eat for emotional reasons? Unlike alcoholics who can always avoid alcohol, everyone has to eat, and eat everyday.  So, what to do when your brain responds the way it does to food? Here’s a couple of practical ideas to start you down the right path:

1. Get a “coach” or counselor who you will be completely honest with. This coach will help you construct an eating schedule and an array of responses to eating or purging temptations.

2. Construct a realistic eating schedule that avoids avoiding food. Keep a food journal. Be honest. Keep troubleshooting with your coach until you find something that works best for you. Remember to check out your schedule (times and foods allowed) with a nutritionist.

3. Construct and use an array of behavioral responses to eating temptations. These include distractions, connections with others, ways to make the moment better, crisis call opportunities.

4. Develop mindful techniques to focus on eating, on stopping eating, on other forms of pleasure God has given you–even on the difficult emotions that you feel.

5. Identify controlling automatic thoughts and lies in your “script” that drive you in particular emotional and behavioral directions. These can be about your body image, about your relationships, etc. Begin responding to them with truth from God’s point of view. Make sure your coach and others know what truthes you are trying hard to believe.

6. As you recognize triggers, temptations, etc., also identify “ways of escape” offered you by God.

Leave a comment

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling science, eating disorders, Mindfulness, Psychology

Tagged as , ,

March 31, 2009 · 5:42 am

The Value of Psychological Testing


My friend, former teacher, mentor, Ed Welch, has posted a blog on the CCEF website on the topic of psychological testing and how biblical counselors might view it. You can see his blog here as well as my comment on their site: http://www.ccef.org/psychological-tests-are-you-or-against#comment-28

Ed, as you will see, isn’t really against testing, recognizes value in it, but doesn’t really think they are all that special–no more so than a really good interview. And, in part, he is right. A really good counselor/interviewer and learn a lot. In my mind, though, testing provides confirmation of what you are learning about the counselee PLUS uncovers subtle data that you might not get quickly or at all (especially through the more objective forms of testing).

It seems people think about testing in one of two ways: either they think testing uncovers secrets that couldn’t be gotten without a test or they dismiss it as pure theory. It is neither. Good testing provides a response profile that one can look at and compare to either the general population or a specific population. That, in itself, isn’t all that helpful but when combined with a specific assessment question, the examiner can interpret the data and build good hypotheses to direct future counseling and intervention.

I love to do psych testing. I find that interacting with test results and counselees provides dialog points that wouldn’t have been as easily discovered or talked about without the data in front of us. For example, if someone takes a personality test and one of the scales suggests that they are approaching the test in a manner consistent with those who are trying to look better than they really are, that provides an opportunity to discuss an pattern in their life that we might not have had the chance to do so easily.

4 Comments

Filed under biblical counseling, christian counseling, christian psychology, counseling, counseling science, Psychology

Tagged as , , , ,