These students' objections were animal rights based; but more importantly, I was left with the impression that they could not see any relevance to their clinical studies in that type of research. If they were going to sit in a private practice and help garden variety depressions, anxieties, etc. then why or why did they need to know something about how the brain is affected in animals by drug x or experience y?
Yes the quotation marks around the word 'professional' were well-placed in the sense that this was pre-Psy-D, so it was still a phd program, but clearly one of those where students paid through the nose to get that cherished piece of paper to hang on their wall, to get instruction directly targetting the passing of the licensing exam, and to get that shingle to hang outside their front door. At the time they were trying to get APA approval for the program; had been denied just recently, and were needing to make their courses a bit more rigorous and scientifically based and in that vein hired me and and a few others to teach courses for them. I believe this is why the dean stood behind me--he saw the need and he understood what I was doing but it's hard when money drives the program. Incidentally, when I went through my undergrad courses in the early to mid 70's it was quite possible to avoid all dealings with animals, if one so desired, at a large enough university. That was the 'touchy-feely' era of humanists. Annette Quoting Michael Scoles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I assumed that the objection was animal-rights based. If it is based on > we humans being so "special", there is enough information to show even > the most close-minded person that some things learned from animals have > helped humans. > > As for David's question, it wouldn't surpise me if the objection came > from a student in a master's-level counseling program or even a PsyD. > The quotes arund "professional" are well-placed. (Maybe I've been > rightly admonished for putting them around "helping.") > > > > Michael T. Scoles, Ph.D. > Interim Chair, Dept. Psychology & Counseling > University of Central Arkansas > Conway, AR 72035 > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/26/04 3:00 PM >>> > Maybe I didn't get it right, but I didn't come to the conclusion that > it was animal research that the students were particularly concerned > about, but using animal research to make inferences about human beings, > who for many conservative students in my part of the country is > sacrilegious. For them, humans were created as we are and to try to > suggest that we evolved from a lower species is just not okay. > > Dr. Bob Wildlbood > Lecturer in Psychology > Indiana University Kokomo > Kokomo, IN 56904-9003 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On 26 Dec, 2004, at 14:13, Shearon, Tim wrote: > > > I agree with David. But then I wondered if there are programs for > > getting an undergraduate degree that don't use animal studies in their > > > courses of study. (Personally, that is hard for me to fathom in light > > of my own experiences). Are there people on the list who would have a > > program allowing students who object to animal research (or whatever > > name the students tend to give to it). I'm sure that some of our > > students could get through and claim or even really not remember it > > (sic) but I'm really wondering if there are undergraduate > > counseling/SW tracks that might not include much reference to the > > animal literature. Tim Shearon, Chair and professor of psychology, > > Albertson College, Caldwell, ID 83605 (off list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Epstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Sun 12/26/2004 10:16 AM > > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences > > Cc: > > Subject: Re: Conservative Students Target Liberal Profs > > On Sun, 26 Dec 2004, Annette Taylor, Ph. D. went: > > > >> Shades of when I taught a graduate course in adult development and > >> aging at a "professional" school--half the class stopped their > >> reading of the text (Handbook of the psychology of aging) because > >> one of the earlier papers mentioned evidence based on animal > >> studies. They were so offended at the idea of using animals in > >> research, > > > > They were in a professional graduate *psychology* program and they > > were startled to encounter a reference to lab-animal research? How > > had they gotten that far? > > > > --David Epstein > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > <winmail.dat>--- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. Department of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
