national standards for psychological literacy and global citizenship

three issues remain: (a) there is less than full acceptance of the GAs other than knowledge
and research, given that the remaining GAs, if assessed appropriately, may have significant
resource implications; (b) a reconsideration is required of the specifics of these GAs/SLOs in
light of the re-examination of the aims of UG psychology education, and (c) the
determination of TLOs is required, particularly given the role that APAC may play in the
relationships amongst TEQSA, the HE Standards Panel, and the discipline and profession of
psychology.
(a) Barriers to Full Acceptance of the GAs
Although some heads of psychology see the value of ensuring that all graduates have, for
example, good communication skills (beyond report-writing), others appear to take the
stand that a teacher-centred focus on knowledge and research is the core, and anything else
is an unnecessary threat to the success of the department. In the current HE environment
with its emphasis on research reputation, this stand is not unrealistic, and this needs to be
taken into consideration as Australian psychology education moves forward. In particular, it
may be that the push toward psychological literacy must first focus on developing the
scientific literacy component, to fit best with the current focus of most departmental
programs. Most heads of psychology will find that they need to focus on the employability
component, given the demands of students and education accountability bodies. The global
citizenship component will be viewed as aspirational by most heads; however, again it will
be students, and the more globally oriented accountability bodies, that will eventually
encourage heads of psychology to integrate that component into their programs.
(b) Reconsideration of the GAs/SLOs and the Structure of the UG Curriculum
During the 2010 APEN Meeting discussions of the GAs and associated SLOs, it became clear
that some educators thought that some of the SLOs that were not included in the APAC
Standards should be (e.g., interpersonal communication). Others, however, thought that the
APAC listing was already too prescriptive. In the original delineation of the GAs, it was stated
that these should be revised periodically. Given this, one activity undertaken at the April
2012 Summit was the revision of the SLOs. Since then, a new conceptualisation of the
central role of application in the UG curriculum has been created and presented in a Green
Paper (Cranney & Botwood, 2012), including the revised standards document that has been
separately submitted to the APAC Standards Review (see Appendix F). Depending on the
feedback, the paper may be revised and resubmitted to the APAC Review.
(c) Minimal Levels of Attainment of the GAs
During the April 2012 Summit, a further activity undertaken by delegates was to attempt to
create standards based assessment statements for each edited GA, with reference to the
SLOs. This met with varying success, such that further work is needed before it can be
determined if this outcome is possible and useful. Indeed, the delineation of levels of
achievement may be required by the HE Standards Panel and TEQSA, and thus may need to
be a central concern of APAC and HODSPA. It should be noted that capstone experiences
are considered key instruments for allowing students and the accountability agencies
(engaged in cross-university benchmarking exercises) to realise the level of attainment of
GAs.
NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL LITERACY AND GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP 9