Chuck Huff wrote: > So, the wrap is: we are definitely post-Kohlberg, but no overarching > paradigm is taking hold yet. It is actually a pretty exciting time. > This might be a good thing to write about in text books, so students > can see why a theory gets superceded and how we try to build new ones > based on data. >
To broaden this thread just a tad. I am often frustrated by the amount of information in texts (particularly Introductory Psychology and Human Development textbooks) that is out-of-date, not supported by data, etc. Even more problematic is when theories such as Freud, Kohlberg (as well as Gilligan), and others are presented as fact. My sense is that more current research, international research, etc. could be added if some of the historically included but perhaps less useful information were deleted or at least truncated. I know what I would like to see culled from some of these texts but I'm curious as to what others would omit and what they would put in its place. Kohlberg, Gilligan, Erikson, and Freud have always been at the top of my list of pet peeves for included intro material. I've always thought that many of the textbook research methods sections should be expanded, more research from outside the U.S. should be included, and the applied value of psychology as a science should receive greater attention. Best, Linda -- Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D. Book Review Editor, H-Genocide Associate Professor - Psychology Coordinator - Holocaust & Genocide Studies, Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Human Rights Webster University 470 East Lockwood St. Louis, MO 63119 Main Webpage: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's (and woman's) best friend. . . . Inside a dog, it's too dark to read." - Groucho Marx --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
