The Psychologizing of Education: Lessons Learned in the Trenches

• In Event: A 360 View of Learning: Educational Psychologists Grapple With the Contemporary Higher Education Landscape

Abstract

The fact that classroom teachers should possess an understanding of learning, development, and motivation is traditionally not a matter of dispute between educational psychologists and educational practitioners (Nezhad & Vahedi, 2011). Those of us who teach educational psychology are able to easily see the relevance and meaningfulness of our discipline to the k-12 learning environment (Anderson, Blumenfeld, Pintrich, Clark, Marx & Peterson, 1995; Berliner, 2006). However, a considerable gap between theory and practice continues to exist with both practitioners and psychologists frequently attributing blame towards one another. As Alexander (2017) points out in her featured article:
“Perhaps the relationship between educational psychology researchers and school practitioners and policymakers will never be entirely harmonious. However, it is an association that remains worth of whatever efforts toward reconciliation are required. Minimally, it seems essential for those identifying as educational psychologists and seeking to forge meaningful relationships with members of educational institutions to understand the culture of those institutions and the pressing concerns that school leadership and practicing teachers face daily.”
In this presentation, I build upon one of the proposed educational psychology legacies identified by Alexander, the psychologizing of education, citing examples from my recent experience in a K-12 partnership.

In spring of 2018 I will work as a visiting staff member at The Brennen School, an academic facility for the Delaware Autism Program, as part of sabbatical leave from Millersville University. Brennen is a public program that serves Delaware students from birth to age 21 with educational classifications of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Students are provided a full continuum of educational settings.

If our legacy of educational psychology is to “psychologize education,” we need to bring scientific evidence into the realm of education not by a transmission model in which we “tell” practitioners how to apply principles from our discipline. Rather, we need to be sensitive to contexts in which schools, classrooms, teachers and students are situated. Moreover, we need to realize the parameters in which educators perform their craft, recognizing that classrooms are not laboratories with controlled variables. To borrow a concept from educational psychology, Bronfenbrenner’s (1977) ecological model may be a useful approach for understanding the contextual influences that exist. Some environments may be laden with (or without) principles from educational psychology, but recognition of systems in which individuals exist may have implications for the ways in which findings from our discipline may be of use to educators.

In the spirit of collaborative relationships built on mutual respect and desired understanding, I propose that educational psychologists can better psychologize education and build stronger university-school partnerships by spending sustained amounts of time in classrooms working alongside practitioners, navigating the K-12 landscape and grappling with daily challenges that teachers encounter. I’m hopeful that doing so will foster a symbiotic relationship and that my fellow practitioners and I can learn together about the ways in which our discipline psychologizes education. It is my contention that my time in the trenches will teach me to become a more thoughtful educational psychologist.

Author

• Laurie B. Hanich, Millersville University of Pennsylvania