Ed Psych Announcements
The theme for IWALS 2018 is “Perspectives on the Learner: Cognition, Brain, and Education”. This theme embraces cross-discipline and cross-method perspectives on learning: its neural bases, its cognitive, social and motivational components, and how learning occurs in formal and informal educational settings. The workshop venue is the University of Pittsburgh’s Learning Research and Development Center (LRDC), a center for research in learning and education sciences for over 50 years. The University venue and the limited registration are designed to encourage interactions among participants.
Invited Keynote Lecture, Posters, Spoken Slide Presentation, and Symposia
General topics for submission include:
- Motivation and Engagement
- Learning in the Digital Age
- Language Learning
- Math and Science Learning
- Brain Systems for Learning
Submit a Proposal: All proposals are to be submitted electronically to https://pitt.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3ING20oTNVcJy4J.
Registration is discounted until March 31 – register here
More details can be found at the IWALS website http://www.iwals2018.pitt.edu/
The 2018 Kauffman Junior Faculty Fellowship (KJFF) Request for Proposals is available online, and nominations are being accepted by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation through an EXTENDED DEADLINE of January 30, 2018. This program recognizes junior faculty who are beginning to establish a record of scholarship and exhibit the potential to make significant contributions to the body of research in the field of entrepreneurship. The Kauffman Foundation will award up to seven fellowships to junior faculty members from universities across the United States. Each Fellow’s university will receive a grant of $35,000 over three years to support the research activities of the Fellow.
The Kauffman Junior Faculty Fellowship in Entrepreneurship Research is intended to support the research activities of eligible junior faculty members who are actively pursuing research in the field of entrepreneurship. Research can be conducted on any topic of importance to entrepreneurship. The Kauffman Foundation is particularly interested in questions related to regional dynamics, local ecosystems, demographic dimensions of entrepreneurship, market gaps, economic growth, entrepreneurship policy, declining business dynamism, networks, design of policy interventions and programmatic research (research that investigates entrepreneurship programs such as accelerators, training programs, etc). The Kauffman Foundation encourages insights across disciplines and fields, including but not limited to anthropology, biology, computer science, finance, geography, economics, law, management, mathematics, psychology, public administration and policy, and sociology.
Details of the Kauffman Junior Faculty Fellowship and the 2018 Call for Nominations can be found at http://www.kauffman.org/microsites/kjff/. Nominations must be made by 5:00 p.m. Central Time on Tuesday, January 30, 2018. The nominee will then be invited to complete the online application by 5:00 p.m. Central Time on Monday, March 12, 2018. Please direct all questions email@example.com.
The Kauffman Junior Faculty Fellowship in Entrepreneurship Research is one of three academic recognition programs established by the Kauffman Foundation to aid the Foundation in achieving its goal of building the field of entrepreneurship research. More information on the Kauffman Entrepreneurship Scholars can be found here.
Behavioral Sciences & the Law is seeking statisticians interested in collaborating with legal scholars and social scientists in a forthcoming special issue on The Use of Statistics in Criminal Cases, to be edited by Christopher Slobogin, J.D., LL.M., a senior editor for the journal. James R. Andretta, Ph.D. will assist in coordinating and editing the special issue.
Very little attention has been given to statistics in the field of behavioral sciences and the law. For one, there no statistical guidelines for determining the admissibility of empirical research in expert witness testimony. The field is also without guidelines for the reporting of statistics in legal proceedings more broadly. For these reasons, and many more, we are hoping to spark a sea change in the application of statistics to criminal cases. If you are a statistician who is interested in pursuing this mission statement, please sign your name and contact information to the Google Docs page below: The page will be distributed to many legal scholars, social scientists, and statisticians in hopes of forming ideal collaborations for the special issue: https://goo.gl/T9f2ik
Original research reports, literature reviews and policy papers that address the following issues are especially welcome: (1) use, misuse, abuse or potential uses of statistics in cases involving jury selection, risk assessment, policing, DNA analysis, or any other area of criminal law; (2) how judges have applied (or should apply) statistics to their gatekeeping function; (3) best practices for relying on and describing statistics in expert witness testimony; (4) the teaching and instruction of statistics across the varied programs that prepare professionals to work on criminal cases; (5) agency and relevant association standards for the reporting and interpretation of statistics in criminal cases; (6) how statistical standards might be used to determine the admissibility of empirical research in expert witness testimony.
Manuscripts should be 20 to 30 doubled-spaced typewritten pages and should comply with the editorial and referencing style of the most recent edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association or the Harvard law Review’s The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation (but not both). Specific stylistic requirements can be found in a recent copy of the journal, or can be obtained via direct communication with the journal’s editors (Chris Slobogin, Charles Ewing and Alan Felthous).
To expedite processing, submit your manuscript electronically. Authors should use e-mail attachment, with the manuscript readable in Windows-based MS Word or Word Perfect formats. Manuscripts must be received before September 1, 2018. Please submit electronically to: Christopher Slobogin, Vanderbilt University Law School 131 21st Ave. South, Nashville, Tn. 37203 firstname.lastname@example.org
Up to $25,000 to improve the quality of education in psychological science and its application in secondary schools for high ability students.
The Esther Katz Rosen Pre-College Psychology Grant Program provides financial support for efforts aimed at improving the quality of education in psychological science and its application in the secondary schools for high ability students. Proposals must focus on supplying education for gifted and talented high school students.
Proposals will be evaluated on:
- Conformance with stated program goals
- Nature and magnitude of incremental contribution
- Capability for accomplishing the proposed work
- Likelihood of producing generalizable outcomes
- Be an educational institution, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, or individual affiliated with qualifying institution.
See our website for more information http://www.apa.org/apf/funding/rosen-precollege.aspx
Click here to apply for this grant: https://www.grantinterface.com/Home/Logon?urlkey=apa&
The deadline for applications is March 1, 2018.
A focused collection of qualitative studies in the psychological sciences: Reasoning and participation in formal and informal learning environments – Guest Editors: Tanner LeBaron Wallace and Eric Kuo
Reasoning and participation are two central topics of education research in the psychological sciences. Understanding the mechanisms that govern thought and reasoning has long been a core enterprise of educational psychology and, over time, more modern views on learning have promoted participation as a key feature for research—either as a facilitator of learning, a practice to be learned, or as an operationalization of learning itself.
We are pleased to announce a focused collection highlighting qualitative studies of reasoning and participation in formal and informal learning environments. By inviting studies incorporating qualitative methods, we aim to complement the experimental and longitudinal statistical research on these topics that is typically published in this journal. We encourage submission of papers focused on the following (or closely related) topics:
- Student reasoning and/or participation in novel learning environments or activities
- The relations between student reasoning, motivation, identity, and participation
- Student perceptions and meaning-making during participatory experiences
- Dynamic models of student reasoning that are grounded in data
- Explanatory accounts for how and why participation is successful (or not)
- Identifying new goals or targeted outcomes for reasoning or participation
We especially welcome qualitative studies that demonstrate the possibilities for unique discovery afforded by inductive analysis of rich data sources (e.g., real-time recordings of student reasoning, participation, discourse, and physical action, students’ meaning-making anchored to particular interactions experienced). This collection will highlight the benefits of qualitative methods for extending and deepening theoretical and empirical understandings of reasoning and participation in both formal and informal learning environments.
The deadline for manuscript submissions is March 1, 2018. We invite authors to contact the Guest Editors of this collection, Tanner LeBaron Wallace (email@example.com) and Eric Kuo (firstname.lastname@example.org), for discussion on how to maximize alignment between their submissions and this focused collection, though it is not required. Please follow both APA guidelines as well as specific submission criteria for the journal. When submitting manuscripts, please also indicate your intent to submit to this focused collection in the required cover letter.
All manuscripts must be submitted electronically at http://www.editorialmanager.com/edu. In the submission portal, please select the article type “Special Section: Reasoning & Participation – Qualitative.” For more information on the Journal of Educational Psychology, please visit http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/edu/.
The following is a note from Dr. Jessica Henderson Daniel, 2018 APA President, regarding APA’s new Citizen PsychologistTM initiative:
I have long been committed to recognizing psychologists for their contributions to, and leadership within the communities in which they work and live. I also believe that psychologists must be in the room, at the table and at the head of the table where decisions are made, whether in healthcare, federal and state policy, community enrichment programs, or elsewhere. My longstanding interest in diversity underlies my strong belief that inclusion at all levels adds to the richness and diversity of all communities.
The APA Citizen PsychologistTM initiative grew out of my mantra: Psychology Is Every Day In Every Way. I would like APA members to be energized and motivated as they discover how to serve as an APA Citizen PsychologistTM! So I am launching it as my core initiative as 2018 President of APA.
Overall, the initiative seeks to establish the ongoing importance of the Citizen Psychologist movement as part of the education of each new generation of psychologists, and bring the science of psychology into decision making on community programming, legislation, and other processes that have the potential to improve the lives of all members of society. There are three short-term strategies in the Citizen Psychologist initiative:
- Recognize Citizen Psychologist leaders through APA Presidential Citations. You can read more on that below.
- Develop and disseminate learning objectives for attaining the competencies required for becoming a Citizen Psychologist at all levels of learning: High school, undergraduate, graduate, internship, postdoctoral, and lifelong learning. That effort is underway and will include a working summit in April at the APA building.
- Obtain baseline survey data for the frequency and roles that psychologists are currently engaged in nationally as Citizen Psychologists. The survey will launch to all APA members this month, so stay tuned.
Defining the concept:
Being a Citizen Psychologist means demonstrating engagement in your community. Engagement can be at any level—from just beginning to explore opportunities in one’s neighborhood that might benefit from a psychological lens, to sustaining meaningful connections with civic and public sector partners on a project of several months or years, to delivering impactful change through exceptional leadership. Roles are as varied as being a long-term volunteer for community programs such as Meals-on-Wheels or Habitat for Humanity; being a state delegate for a political party; participating in your church ministries; volunteering as a content expert speaker for a non-profit organization, such as the local Alzheimer’s Association; fund raising for a charity of your choice; and so on. Showing leadership as a Citizen Psychologist, one might begin and sustain a mentoring program for a vulnerable population in the community; be elected to a community position such as the School Board or the City Council; be appointed to the Executive Committee of a local or national non-profit or professional organization; and so on.
Nominate yourself and others for a presidential citation:
Exceptional leadership activities of Citizen Psychologists will be recognized specifically by me this year with APA Presidential Citations. There are six criteria for our selection process for an APA Presidential citation. Nominees must be a member of APA; hold a doctorate in any psychology subfield; have sustained activities in improving their communities; bring psychological science or expertise to these activities beyond their day-to-day work as psychologists; and at least one of their community roles must be as a leader, demonstrating exceptionality in said leadership role.
Although I will award citations throughout 2018, planning began last fall for opportunities to deliver these citations, and nominations are being reviewed every week. One’s best chance of getting recognized in the 2018 calendar year is to prepare a nomination as soon as possible. If you nominate someone as a group, please list the group that made the nomination under the nominator’s institutional affiliation (e.g. “Division XX executive board”). Whereas the application portal will remain open through early July 2018, do not delay—prepare a nomination now. We have a printable nomination-prep guide and we encourage questions via email to Presidential Citation Working Group Chairs Sharon Bowman, PhD and Cynthia de las Fuentes, PhD.
My dream is that the APA Citizen PsychologistTM concept will be infused into the discipline through education at all levels—from high school to lifelong learning. It is important to me that this concept of service to the public good endures as an integral part of APA’s future.
It is rewarding to be in such a dynamic and expansive discipline—and I am excited to see where our members will take psychology next.
Jessica Henderson Daniel, PhD, ABPP
2018 APA President
Race-Reimaging Educational Psychology Research: Investigating Constructs through the Lens of Race and Culture
Guest Editors: J. Sharif Matthews, Montclair State University, & Francesca López, University of Arizona
Despite the increasing racial and cultural diversity within the United States and other developed countries, race-based research articles only represent 1.3% of all published articles in top educational psychology journals since the turn of the century (DeCuir-Gunby & Schutz, 2014). Consequently, there is a need to acknowledge race and culture as central yet understudied constructs in educational psychology research. However, beyond simply increasing the representation of race-based research in educational psychology, this Special Issue primarily aims to promote greater integrity in how race and cultural constructs are handled in the theories, methods, analyses and interpretations of educational psychology research.
Race-reimaging in educational psychology research means understanding the significance of race and culture beyond social identifiers of diverse people groups; more over examining race and culture as rich sociopolitical experiences that provide deep and nuanced meaning to the very constructs we consider central in teaching and learning. DeCuir-Gunby and Schutz (2014) note that race-reimaged constructs are traditional educational psychology constructs (e.g., self-efficacy, self-regulation, achievement motivation) that are re-conceptualized to include racially influenced, sociocultural perspectives (e.g. history, context, multiple identities).
Research designs claiming “diverse” ethnic minority samples or race as a moderator variable have set a low standard for acknowledging race and culture in psychological research. Similarly, studies that simply compare racial-cultural groups on key learning outcomes can limit a deeper consideration of race and perpetuate perceived deficiencies in the marginalized group (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Yee, Fairchild, Weizmann, & Wyatt, 1993). Overall, more research is needed that examines the complex influences of race, culture, and sociopolitical histories on psychological functioning in educational spaces.
This Special Issue
Contemporary Educational Psychology calls for empirical manuscripts that provide a race-reimaged perspective on traditional educational psychology constructs. We invite papers across a variety of topics (e.g., expectancy-value, school readiness) across four broad areas that have comprised educational psychology research over the past three decades. These areas are a) Functional Processes in Learning (e.g., motivation, volition, or emotions), b) Learner Readiness and Development (e.g., cognitive development, identity development, language development, or character/moral education), c) Domain Expertise (e.g., mathematics education, or civic education), and d) Classroom and Task Environment (e.g., assessment, teacher perceptions, collaborative learning, or technology). Proposed papers should be focused on learning or development, and quantitative studies should include data beyond self-report. These are basic requirements for all papers published in Contemporary Educational Psychology. Papers will also be evaluated according to their methodological rigor, quality of writing, novelty, theoretical significance, and appropriateness in addressing the call on race-reimaging.
Here are some representative, although not fully exhaustive, examples of race re-imaging research in educational psychology. Rodgers and Summers (2008) re-conceptualized a psychological model to explain retention in college students to be more culturally sensitive of Black college students’ experiences and retention trends in predominantly white versus historically black colleges and universities. Matthews (2017) underscored how attainment value in mathematics may have unique contextualized meaning for stigmatized urban adolescents beyond the traditional conceptualization of “I think of myself as a math person.” López (2017) interrogated the teacher expectancy literature, illustrating how teacher expectancies of Latino children’s reading abilities indeed act as self-fulfilling prophecies, but are also culturally biased. She showed how critical consciousness in combination with high expectations represent a productive teacher belief system related to increased achievement and ethnic identity for Latino children. For other examples of race-reimaged research in educational psychology, see DeCuir-Gunby and Schutz (2014).
There will be a two-stage review process employed for this Special Issue. First prospective authors are required to submit a 1-2 page summary of their proposed manuscript. The summary should include:
• a brief description of the topic
• theoretical significance in educational psychology, race, or culture
• details on the data and methodological design
• an overview of results and interpretation
These summaries will be evaluated by the co-editors.
Second, authors of the summaries that appear to meet the goals of the Special Issue will be asked to submit full manuscripts through the CEP EVISE system. Those full manuscripts will then undergo a blind peer review. All manuscripts will be expected to meet CEP’s standards for publication as well as the goals of the Special Issue. The external review process will determine which submissions are ultimately included in the Special Issue.
The timeline for the submission and the initial external review is as follows:
- April 1, 2018: Summaries of proposed submissions are due to editors.
- May 1, 2018: Guest editors will respond to all summary submissions and notify authors if they have been selected to submit a full manuscript.
- Oct 1, 2018: Full manuscripts due to the online submission system.
DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., & Schutz, P. A. (2014). Researching race within educational psychology contexts. Educational Psychologist, 49, 244-260. doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.957828
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 45-56.
López, F. A. (2017). Altering the trajectory of the self-fulfilling prophecy: Asset-based
pedagogy and classroom dynamics. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(2), 193-212. DOI: 10.1177/0022487116685751
Matthews, J. (2017). When am I going to use this in the real world? Cognitive flexibility and urban adolescents’ negotiation of the value of mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology. doi: 10.1037/edu0000242
Rodgers, K. A., & Summers, J. J. (2008). African American students at predominantly white
institutions: A motivational and self-systems approach to understanding retention.
Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), 171-190. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-008-9072-9
Yee, A. H., Fairchild, H. H., Weizmann, F., & Wyatt, G. E. (1993). Addressing psychology’s
problem with race. American Psychologist, 48, 1132–1140.
TUESDAY, JAN 16, 2018 12:00 EDT; 9:00 PDT
Please see https://div52.org/index.php/webinars/web-martin2
Cost: $10-25; CE credits additional
Description: Creativity in the Workplace
By Daniel E. Martin, PhD, California State University
Moderator: Lynette Bikos, PhD, Seattle Pacific University
In his current research, Dr. Dan Martin is looking at belief systems associated with prejudice, sexism, and socio-political conservatism (referred to as Social Dominance Orientation), and how that can interfere with the ability of leaders to be compassionate in the workplace. His research spans multiple occupations and organizations. During this webinar, Dr. Martin will share some of what he is learning, and also discuss preliminary results of an interpersonal, compassion-based intervention that may help leaders and organizations address negative behaviors within an institution that can raise healthcare costs and lower job performance.
Guidance reflects pattern of devaluing science, APA asserts
WASHINGTON — In the wake of news reports about Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other Health and Human Services employees being “banned” from using certain words, the American Psychological Association welcomed statements today by the CDC director indicating the agency remains committed to its public health mission and will continue to base its policies on the best available scientific evidence.
“We in the science community urge the administration to support evidence-based government programs, particularly those that focus on improving life for the most vulnerable Americans, including transgender people, who have some of the highest rates of suicide in the nation. The ability to discuss scientific research and the ways it affects individuals and populations, including those who are marginalized, is necessary to keeping our nation healthy and safe,” said APA CEO Arthur C Evans Jr. “Limiting discussion of these populations will not make them go away, nor will it lessen the need for public health programs and scientific research.”
Evans’s comments were in response to news reports that employees of the CDC and possibly other agencies within HHS were given guidance dissuading them from using seven words or phrases in agency budget documents, specifically: vulnerable, entitlement, diversity, transgender, fetus, evidence-based and science-based. Statements from the CDC indicated that the news coverage misrepresented the intent, which was a tactic to ensure documents would be more likely to be approved by a Republican Congress if certain words were excluded.
“Restricting these key words follows this administration’s disturbing pattern of devaluing science in myriad ways, including limiting its scientists from attending meetings, controlling what its scientists can say to the public, rolling back data collection efforts, and leaving key federal science agency positions unfilled,” said APA President Antonio E. Puente, PhD. “Federal policies and programs affecting public health and science must rest on empirical research. The way we talk about it is critical as it sets the tone for our nation, and affects our ability to use science to make life better for people.“
The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA’s membership includes nearly 115,700 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people’s lives.
We invite you and one of your female doctoral advisees to participate in a research study entitled, “Female Doctoral Students’ Research Experiences.” If you complete the activities in this study, both you and your advisee will each be compensated with a $20 Amazon gift card.
The purpose of this study is to understand the factors that facilitate female psychology doctoral students’ research self-efficacy. If you are interested in this study, you will nominate up to three of your female doctoral advisees to participate in this study together with you. Not all pairs of advisors and advisees will be selected for this study, and in any case, not more than one of your advisees will be selected to participate in this study.
Although we cannot offer any promises, it is possible that your doctoral advisee might experience an increase in research self-efficacy as a result of participating in this study.
You will complete an online survey consisting of a brief questionnaire and will be asked to write a brief letter of encouragement to your doctoral advisee. (For the time being, please do NOT tell your doctoral advisee about this letter.) The duration of this study for you is about 30 minutes (5 minutes for a brief questionnaire and 25 minutes for the brief letter). The duration of this study for your advisee is about 35 minutes.
To participate in this study, you must satisfy all of the following criteria and also invite at least one of your female doctoral advisees who satisfies all of the following criteria to participate in this study. Both you and your advisee will be eligible for this study only if both of you consent to participate and both of you meet all the criteria for this study. Please read the following criteria carefully, so that you only nominate advisees that meet all the criteria in this study:
1. You are a professor or a researcher at a university/ college in the United States.
2. You currently supervise the research of the female doctoral student whom you intend to invite to participate in this study. We will refer to this student as your “advisee” (even if she is not formally your advisee).
3. Your advisee is a student in a Ph.D. program in psychology or a field closely associated with psychology.
4. Your advisee identifies as a female and is at least 18 years old.
5. This student has been your advisee for at least 3 months.
6. Your advisee is in her first, second, or third year of the Ph.D. program.
7. You are familiar with your doctoral advisee’s research skills and interests.
8. Your research and your advisee’s research relies exclusively or primarily on a quantitative methodology (e.g., both of you use mainly statistics to address your research questions). If your research relies on mixed methods, you still qualify for this study as long as your research is primarily quantitative in nature.
9. On average, you hold a meeting with your advisee at least once a month. A meeting is defined as a face-to-face meeting or video call (e.g., using Skype) that lasts at least 30 minutes- it could be an individual meeting or a group meeting (e.g., a lab session); it includes supervision and discussions on research, practice, professional development, etc. It excludes classes in which you are the instructor.
Ideally, the female doctoral advisee whom you nominate would be someone who might benefit from some encouragement to enhance her research self-efficacy.
If you are interested in participating in this study, simply reply to this email- email@example.com– with your first and last name. Please also give us the first and last name as well as the email addresses of between 1-3 of your female doctoral advisees whom you’re nominating for this study.
IMPORTANT- You are welcome to tell your advisees about this study, but please do NOT forward this email to them and do not tell them about the letter of encouragement. We will send your advisee a separate recruitment email and will copy you on that email.
After your advisee completes her first online survey, we will send you a brief online survey for you to complete.
This study has been approved by Indiana University’s Institutional Review Board. Questions about the project may be directed to firstname.lastname@example.org