- Email: [email protected]
International aspects of school psychology
Journal of School Psychology 1974" Vol. 12, No. 1
INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY AVNER ZIV 1 Boston University Summary: This paper is concerned with various aspects of the philosophy and training of school psychologists in several countries around the world and offers some thoughts about the possible implications of the different approaches. My interest in this question is related to the fact that I received my Ph.D. from the Sorbonne University in Paris, worked as a school psychologist and taught school psychology in Israel, and spent this past year teaching school psychologists in an American University.
One of the most astonishing phenomenons for someone being involved with psychological work in three different cultures is discovering the great ignorance each of these countries has about what is going on in the rest of the world. The lack of communication in scientific knowledge and applications in psychology is amazing. Much of the enormous energy, working time, and funds invested in writing theoretical papers, in researching special programs, and in various other studies is lost t o the international scientific community because of a lack of communication resulting from language differences. Two examples, one involving a theoretical approach to education and one concerning more practical aspects of our work, would illustrate this problem. Jean Piaget is universally considered today as one of the greatest theorists in the field of child development. His first articles were published in the 1920's in France and Switzerland. He brought to psychology entirely new and revolutionary material in his most important books discussing new concepts of cognitive development in children (1936), the perception of reality by children (1937), and moral judgment (1932). Piaget's work, published in French, was taught in French universities, and many experimental studies and educational applications were made in the French-speaking countries. However, in the United States, until the late 1950's, very few books on developmental psychology presented more than a mere mention of Piaget's work. Piaget's work was first translated in England, but it was not until the late 1950's that his books began to be published for distribution in the United States. The impact on psychology and education of his ideas are so important today that Piaget's work has been the object of hundreds of research studies in the United States every year since his theories were introduced here. The tremendous increase in research on Piaget's theories can be demonstrated by observing from Psycholological Abstracts that from 1927-60 only 28 articles dealing with different aspects of Piagetian thought can be found; between I This paper is based on a presentation made in the Distinguished Lecture Series in School Psychology, Boston University, 1973. 31
32
Journal of School Psychology
1961 and 1965, 40 articles appeared; between 1966 and 1968, 102 articles are listed; and from 1969 to the present, more than 100 articles have appeared each year. This upsurge in the interest and application of the theories of Piaget can be attributed in large part to the volume by Flavell (1963), which presents a comprehensive study of the theories of Piaget. Though research has been affected following the publication of this book, it is unfortunate that valuable research time was lost due to simple language barriers. In the area of parent counseling, in which most school psychologists are involved, special efforts have been undertaken in France over the past 20 years, and these have been published in the rich professional literature of the country. The French National Broadcasting Service presents special radio programs, there are three journals published related almost exclusively to parent counseling, and there are many special training programs for both professional and nonprofessional people working with parents. Yet, in one of the best-known books in the United States on the subject, by Auerbach (1968), of the 68 parent counseling references included in the bibliography, not a single one related to research outside the United States, and quite clearly the French model, is not known in this country. Perhaps by looking around us and by trying to understand how other cultures deal with problems in school psychology we would be able to learn a great deal about our own problems. There is no question that we need more knowledge in school psychology, which is a very complex and unclear field. The number of articles appearing in the professional literature in the United States concerning the role of the school psychologist and how he should be trained is enormous. The solutions proposed are very varied (Adamson, 1968 ; Herron, 1966; McDaniel & Ahr, 1966; Mackey & Hassler, 1966; Reilly, 1969 ; Starkman, 1966; Trow, 1966; Silverman, 1969; Wolman, 1967). It is possible that a look at the approaches of other countries to school psychology may be helpful in the conceptualization of one discipline. SOVIET UNION In the USSR there is no school psychology in the sense that we know the profession. The foundation is more general and the specialization is broader in its scope, aiming at child and pedagogical psychology. The training takes five years and the freshman courses include philosophy (including political economy and logic), natural sciences (including physiology, fundamentals of biology, anatomy and evolution of the nervous system), anthropology, mathematics, and a foreign language. From the second year the students have a general psychological foundation. This includes some of the disciplines studied by psychologists the world over. Among the subjects taught at Moscow University, in addition to history of psychology, methodology, and experimental psychology, students receive training in all the main branches of psychology, i.e., child and pedagogical psychology, neuropsychology, pathopsychology, engineering psychology, psychology of labor, social psychology, and zoological psychology. For us, the omission of clinical psychology is certainly the most interesting
International Aspects of School Psychology
33
fact. This is due to the very different approach to mental health. What is known here as depth psychology-based on the Freudian t h e o r y - i s almost completely unknown in the Soviet Union. What we know as school psychology, educational psychology, and certainly educational counseling are comprised in "child and pedagogical psychology." In the fourth year specialization starts and it includes practical training in research methods and developmental diagnosis. Specialization in child and pedagogical psychology is achieved also by special courses and seminars. From the list of 18 specific courses taught this year at Moscow University, two are concerned with speech-psychology of speech and clinical speech pathology. Six courses are concerned with cognitive aspects and one is concerned with methodology; nine are theoretical in nature. Graduation for what we would call school psychology takes five years. Students must defend a graduation thesis and pass state certification examinations. The jobs they are assigned might be in the laboratories of scientific-research institutes and clinics (such as The Institute of Preschool Upbringing, Institute of Defectology, Institute of General and Pedagogical Psychology) and schools, where they would be assistant directors for upbringing, ministries in various scientific departments or in special experimental schools. Those who displayed outstanding scientific ability may go though a postgraduate course which takes three years and is somewhat equivalent to our Ph.D. 2 It seems that the main difference in the training program of Soviet school psychologists, or as they are called, Specialists in Child and Pedagogical Psychology, and the training of American school psychologists, primarily involves stress on the cognitive processes and secondarily stress on the emotional processes. Implications of the Soviet Approach. It seems from the cross-cultural data that there are less behavior problems in the Soviet schools than in western society. Bronfenbrenner (1963) writes: "What impresses this observer, like others before him, about Soviet youngsters, especially those attending schools of the new type, was their 'group behavior.' In their external actions they are well mannered, attentive, and industrious. In informal conversations, they reveal a strong motivation to learn, a readiness to serve their society, and in general, ironically enough, for a culture committed to materialistic philosophy, what can only be described as an idealistic attitude toward life. In keeping with this general orientation, relationships with parents, teachers, and upbringers are those of respectful but affectionate friendships. The discipline of the collective is accepted and regarded as justified, even when severe as judged by western standards [p. 160] ." Bronfenbrenner, in Two Worlds of Childhood, U.S. and U.S.S.R. (1970), presents the collective type of education used in the U.S.S.R. as having numerous advantages. At the Moscow University, in the Department of Pedagogics and Pedagogical Psychology, in the special program of child and pedagogical psychology, there is a course entitled "Relationships in chil2 Gratitude is expressed to Professor Dr. Nina F. Talyzina, head of the Department of Pealagogics and Pedagogical Psychology at Moscow University, who supplied this information.
34
Journal of School Psychology
dren-collective and development of personality," which deals with the special psychological problems in collective education. Would it be possible that the consideration of these approaches could teach us something? The fact that the American culture and the American psychologists stress the emotional aspects of individuals in society has many effects. One consequence of this approach is that many people become "amateur psychologists," quite ready to infer unconscious or hidden motivations to account for all sorts of behavior (Miller, 1969). Valins and Nisbett (1971) give examples of the negative power of the "psychologisation of behavior" and "induced" psychological disturbances. It is always difficult to know whether a special approach to a problem is only a response to a need or whether it provokes some special needs. By reviewing some of the translated Russian professional literature, one finds that the main problems dealt with are cognitive in nature, mainly learning problems. For instance, Lomov (1972), writing about the present and future status and development of psychology in the USSR, has this to say about psychological problems in the schools: "Studies have been made of some of the principles governing the learning of objective knowledge, skills, and practical h a b i t s . . , concrete recommendations, aimed at developing meaningful recall techniques and generalized skills and habits, have been outlined for school children of various ages; and research is being conducted to determine the causes and the ways to overcome failure in schools [p. 336] ." Perhaps the first part of this statement should make us think about the objectives of educational psychology as we know them. The second part could be perhaps closer to our way of looking at school psychology. The problem of failure in the schools seems to be preoccupying the Soviet psychologists. Prokofen (1972) writes: "According to the totals of the 1969-1970 school year, 2.8% of the total number of pupils were grade repeaters. During the year the drop out rate for all grades was 2.5% or 2.3 million persons [p. 92] ." Are these impressive numbers a result of the school curriculum in the Soviet Union or a result of the greater attention given to these problems? Could it be that the greater focus on emotional problems in the school in the United States and the greater focus on cognitive problems in the Soviet Union are not a result of what is actually going on with children, but of a difference in the focus of attention? The Wickman Study of 1935 about attitudes of psychologists and teachers toward behavior problems of children, replicated since then more than ten times, shows that psychologists view severity of the behavior problem somewhat differently than teachers (Ziv, 1970). These differences might be the result of differences in training and in role expectations. FRANCE Considering school psychology in another country, one finds that in France the situation is more compficated because there are two different types of school psychologists: those who work with children from kinder-
International Aspects of School Psychology
35
garten through age 12 and the "orientation counselors," who work on the junior high and high school levels. Their theoretical orientation also is very different from the American one. In a recent paper Riquier (1971) attacks school psychology in France, accusing that it is not faithful to the thought of WaUon. It is amazing to read in this paper that school psychology was founded by WaUon in 1945, and there is absolutely no reference about anything done on this subject in the United States. Riquier herself is astonished that in the formation of school psychologists in 1960 " n o other information about the modern currents of psychology is offered to future psychologists and none of the scientific work done overseas, such as Burlingham, Spitz, Bowlby, to cite only a few, have no right to be presented [p. 26] ." In tracing the historical development of school psychology in France before and after the institution of the school psychology diploma in 1961, she cites the thought tests; almost none known in the United States [p. 28]. The school psychologist has to have five years of teaching experience, but this is more a theoretical expectation of the law than something existing in reality. Then a special diploma given by an institute is required. Other psychologists go through the normal channel of the university to earn "maitrise" (approximately equivalent to our master's degree) in psychology in five years. However, in order to work as a school psychologist, one would have to attend an institute for a special diploma in school psychology. The two things can be done simultaneously, so that in five years one can have both the maitrise and the school psychology diploma. Most French universities differ greatly from one to another and even more greatly from American universities. Most of the professors change the courses they are offering every year or two, and students finishing in different years have a rather different formation. Most of the courses are theoretical, and they certainly go much deeper into the theoretical approach than do American students. The practical aspects are less stressed, and the students are required to do a great deal of reading. Due to the great number of students, classes are huge and the lectures don't allow for much interaction between faculty and the students. (Education is free in France at all levels and there is no selection criteria for admission.) However, laboratories and practical work are organized for small groups, but certainly the theoretical preparation of French psychologists is generally on a higher level than in the United States, and the practical one on a much lower level. The "professional orientors" deal with what we know as vocational guidance in the high school and university levels. They are accepted in special institutes for holding a university degree (approximately equivalent to a B.A.) or for having at least five years of teaching experience. They have to take an entrance examination (based on a bibliography); they study for two years while being paid an average salary. In their program, in addition to courses in child and adolescent psychology, they have a serious program in vocational guidance and a very large practicum. We can see that in France there are really two separate professions: school psychology and vocational guidance. The training of school psychologists involves a very thorough theoretical formation, but in the field they have a rather limited and restricted area of work, which for the most part involves
36
Journal of School Psychology
only testing. The professional orientors have a greater practical formation, and they deal only with the guidance aspects at all levels of education.
GERMANY In Germany the school psychology field is currently in a developmental phase. There are new programs in school psychology at the Universities of Hamburg and Bonn. The training of the school psychologist takes four to five years; some students have training as teachers, but the newest trend is to have them study only psychology and then require only one-half year of teaching experience (mainly teaching psychology in high schools). After obtaining a diploma, the school psychologist works for a year as an assistant to a school psychologist. They are trained in the departments of psychology and the curriculum is rather similar to the American one. The Ph.D. degree requires two more years of study. School psychologists work in small institutes grouping from 5-15 psychologists working in the school problems of a city. Lately, some large schools with 2,000 pupils or more have their own school psychologist. German psychologists, contrary to those we have reviewed until this point, do counseling and psychotherapy mostly with pupils, but also do some counseling with teachers and parents. 3 However, judging from a brochure published by the division of school psychology of the German Psychological Association, the school psychologist should have some additional roles. HOLLAND In Holland in the last ten years there is a great development in school psychology due to important changes in the structure of the educational system (Van den Broek, 1969). The school psychologist and the educational specialist work together on changing school curriculum and generally the school psychologist working alone is seldom found. The diagnostic process in which the school psychologist works alone is not found in the Dutch approach, but it is done according to the team approach. Therefore, they have more and more of what they call "consulting services in the school," in which the school psychologist is one of the members of a team. The school psychologist in Holland is very much involved in research (too much according to Dr. Langeveld of Amsterdam). 4 He does research on the macropsychological level in the schools (as contrasted to the micropsy/6hological aspect in individual work). Among the experimental work in which he is involved is the special "play-learning" classes between kindergarten and the first grade. Teachers are trained by the school psychologist to observe the children's behavior. The great emphasis in research appears also in the 3 Thanks to Professor Dr. H. Thomae from the Psychological Institute of the University of Bonn and to Professor Dr. Reinhard Tausch from the Institute of Psychology of Hamburg University, who supplied this information. 4 Thanks to Professor Dr. Langeveld from the University of Amsterday who supplied his comments on the training and work of school psychologists in Holland.
International Aspects of School Psychology
37
technology of education, the main themes being the teaching of mathematics, use of audio-visual means in teaching, programmed instruction, school television, and language laboratories. Training for the Ph.D. takes six years and the student can have his first degree in either psychology or education. He can make the same choice at the doctoral level, because there is a common theme in these two disciplines, namely specialization in education. We can see that the school psychologist in Holland better fits the role of educational psychologist as we know it in the United States, rather than the role of school psychologist. ISRAEL In Israel school psychology and educational psychology are seen as different aspects of the same discipline. The training of school psychologists stresses both the aspects of practical work in the school setting and the research aspect. Three universities in Israel have special training programs in school psychology at the master's level. This degree is considered a professional degree sufficient to psychologists working in school. School psychologists are employed not by the school systems but by the municipalities. The school psychologist is considered a normal function of the school system and although the situation where each school in Israel has the services of school psychologists available has not yet been attained, it is one of the objectives of the services of educational psychology and counseling in the Ministry of Education. The fact that school psychologists in Israel are not administratively dependent on the school superintendent gives a greater possibility for him to function on a real professional level. Although different approaches to the work of the school psychologist exist in Israel, the predominant model is a modified clinical one. School psychologists work together in an Educational Psychology Center and their number varies as a function of the school population they work with. Each psychologist works with one to three schools and works one or two days in the school. He observes children in the classroom and outside it, has individual or group meetings with children and teachers, and participates in the team meetings of the school. The teams include the superintendent, the school nurse, the educational social worker, and the school counselor. When the team discusses the problems of a particular child, his teacher is invited to participate. In the teams a policy is decided upon and the roles of different participants are prescribed. An important part of school psychologists' work takes place in the Educational Psychology Center. Here they can work as a team, sometimes collaborating on a research project or in applied projects in one school. One such example is the work of the six psychologists of the Central Educational Center in Tel Aviv who worked with six groups of parents at the same time in one school in Tel Aviv (Ziv & Spiegel, 1968). The Center is also a place where group work with parents, children, or teachers is conducted. One important factor in the school psychologist's work in Israel is the existence of the school counselor in most of the Israeli schools. Slowly a
38
Journal of School Psychology
division of work between the two appears: the vocational guidance role becomes more a part of the counselor's work but they both collaborate in working not only with children having learning or emotional difficulties but also with the whole population of children and teachers in the schools. CONCLUSION In conclusion it seems to this author that in the countries he surveyed the role of the school psychologist is defined in a more precise way than in the United States. In the Soviet Union the training and the work are geared toward the cognitive area; in France guidance is a separate profession from school psychology and the theoretical formation is stressed in training; in Holland the school psychologists are more research oriented; in Germany they do counseling and psychotherapy; and in Israel there is an emphasis on preventive action. A study of these approaches, learning from the different experiences, and trying to improve the exchange between school psychologists in the different approaches they are using could be useful to everyone. It would be interesting to know better the French theories of development, their research approaches, and to study the training of their working guidance counselors. Their 20-year-old experience with parent education could certainly be used in the United States. Some approaches of the Soviet psychologists to group education and their cognitive approach to learning in school could also help. The Dutch research experience in teaching methodology in addition to its work with preschool children could provide data and fruitful ideas in similar types of work. The special programs of Israeli school psychologists, the type of team work they are using, could be implemented, or at least experimented with. An International Conference of School Psychologists may be a valuable learning experience for our profession.
REFERENCES Adamson, W. C. A school mental health program: Development and design, Community Mental Health Journal, 1968, 9, 459-460. Auerbach, A. B. Parents learn through discussion: Principles and practices of parent group education. New York: Wiley & Sons, 1968. Bronfenbrenner, A. B. Upbringing in collective settings in Switzerland and the USSR. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Psychology, 1963, 1, 159-161. FlaveU, J. H. The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. Princeton, New Jersey: Van Nostrand, 1963. Herron, W. G. Training school psychologists to do psychotherapy. Psychology in the Schools, 1966, 3, 48-51. Lomov, S. Present status and future development of psychology in USSR and in the light of decision of the 29th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Soviet Psychology, 972, 10 (9), 329-358. McDaniel, L. Y., & Ahr, A. E. The school psychologist as a resource person initiating and conducting in-service teacher education. Psychology in the Schools, 1965, 2, 220-224. Mackey, R. A., & Hassler, F. R. Group consultations with school personnel. Mental Hygiene, 1966, 50, 416-420. M/ller, G. Psychology as a means of promoting human welfare. American Psychologist, 1969, 24, 1063-1075. Piaget, J. Le Developement du Jugement Moral Chez L "enfant. Paris: P.U.F., 1932.
International Aspects of School Psychology
39
Piaget, J. Le Developement de L 'intelligence Chez L 'enfant. Paris: P.U.F., 1936. Piaget, J. La Perception du Reel Chez L 'enfant. Paris: P.U.F., 1937. Prokofev, M. A. The school and its problem. Soviet Education, 1972, 19 (2), 35-55. Reiily, D. H. Goals and roles of school psychology: A community based model. Journel of School Psychology, 1969, 7, 35-37. Riquier, M. Le psychologic scolaire est-elle fidele a la pensee de Wallon. Psychologie Scolaire, 1971,8, 15-41. Silverman, H. L School psychology: Divergent role conceptualization. Psychology in the Schools, 1969, 6, 266-271. Starkman, S. The professional model: Paradox in school psychology. American Psychologist, 1966, 21, 807-808. Trow, W. C. The future of school psychologist by extrapolation. Psychology in the Schools, 1966, 3, 131-139. Valins, S., & Nisbett, R. E. Attribution processes in the development and treatment of emotional disturbances. In E. E. Yones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes o f behavior. Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press, 1971. Van den Brock, P. La psychologic scolaire aux Pays Bas au cours des dix dernieres annees. La psychologie scolaire, 1969, 6, 45-52. Wolman, T. G. Implications of social change for school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 1967, 4, 68-70. Ziv. A., & Spiegel, Y. Une ecole de parents en Israel. Le groupe familial, 1968, 40, 52-66. Ziv, A. Children's behavior problems as viewed by teachers, psychologists, and children. Child Development, 1970, 41,871-879. Avner Ziv Associate Professor of Psychology Tel Aviv University, Bar Ilan University Tel Aviv, Israel Received: June 15, 1973 Revision Received: August 20, 1973
INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY AVNER ZIV 1 Boston University Summary: This paper is concerned with various aspects of the philosophy and training of school psychologists in several countries around the world and offers some thoughts about the possible implications of the different approaches. My interest in this question is related to the fact that I received my Ph.D. from the Sorbonne University in Paris, worked as a school psychologist and taught school psychology in Israel, and spent this past year teaching school psychologists in an American University.
One of the most astonishing phenomenons for someone being involved with psychological work in three different cultures is discovering the great ignorance each of these countries has about what is going on in the rest of the world. The lack of communication in scientific knowledge and applications in psychology is amazing. Much of the enormous energy, working time, and funds invested in writing theoretical papers, in researching special programs, and in various other studies is lost t o the international scientific community because of a lack of communication resulting from language differences. Two examples, one involving a theoretical approach to education and one concerning more practical aspects of our work, would illustrate this problem. Jean Piaget is universally considered today as one of the greatest theorists in the field of child development. His first articles were published in the 1920's in France and Switzerland. He brought to psychology entirely new and revolutionary material in his most important books discussing new concepts of cognitive development in children (1936), the perception of reality by children (1937), and moral judgment (1932). Piaget's work, published in French, was taught in French universities, and many experimental studies and educational applications were made in the French-speaking countries. However, in the United States, until the late 1950's, very few books on developmental psychology presented more than a mere mention of Piaget's work. Piaget's work was first translated in England, but it was not until the late 1950's that his books began to be published for distribution in the United States. The impact on psychology and education of his ideas are so important today that Piaget's work has been the object of hundreds of research studies in the United States every year since his theories were introduced here. The tremendous increase in research on Piaget's theories can be demonstrated by observing from Psycholological Abstracts that from 1927-60 only 28 articles dealing with different aspects of Piagetian thought can be found; between I This paper is based on a presentation made in the Distinguished Lecture Series in School Psychology, Boston University, 1973. 31
32
Journal of School Psychology
1961 and 1965, 40 articles appeared; between 1966 and 1968, 102 articles are listed; and from 1969 to the present, more than 100 articles have appeared each year. This upsurge in the interest and application of the theories of Piaget can be attributed in large part to the volume by Flavell (1963), which presents a comprehensive study of the theories of Piaget. Though research has been affected following the publication of this book, it is unfortunate that valuable research time was lost due to simple language barriers. In the area of parent counseling, in which most school psychologists are involved, special efforts have been undertaken in France over the past 20 years, and these have been published in the rich professional literature of the country. The French National Broadcasting Service presents special radio programs, there are three journals published related almost exclusively to parent counseling, and there are many special training programs for both professional and nonprofessional people working with parents. Yet, in one of the best-known books in the United States on the subject, by Auerbach (1968), of the 68 parent counseling references included in the bibliography, not a single one related to research outside the United States, and quite clearly the French model, is not known in this country. Perhaps by looking around us and by trying to understand how other cultures deal with problems in school psychology we would be able to learn a great deal about our own problems. There is no question that we need more knowledge in school psychology, which is a very complex and unclear field. The number of articles appearing in the professional literature in the United States concerning the role of the school psychologist and how he should be trained is enormous. The solutions proposed are very varied (Adamson, 1968 ; Herron, 1966; McDaniel & Ahr, 1966; Mackey & Hassler, 1966; Reilly, 1969 ; Starkman, 1966; Trow, 1966; Silverman, 1969; Wolman, 1967). It is possible that a look at the approaches of other countries to school psychology may be helpful in the conceptualization of one discipline. SOVIET UNION In the USSR there is no school psychology in the sense that we know the profession. The foundation is more general and the specialization is broader in its scope, aiming at child and pedagogical psychology. The training takes five years and the freshman courses include philosophy (including political economy and logic), natural sciences (including physiology, fundamentals of biology, anatomy and evolution of the nervous system), anthropology, mathematics, and a foreign language. From the second year the students have a general psychological foundation. This includes some of the disciplines studied by psychologists the world over. Among the subjects taught at Moscow University, in addition to history of psychology, methodology, and experimental psychology, students receive training in all the main branches of psychology, i.e., child and pedagogical psychology, neuropsychology, pathopsychology, engineering psychology, psychology of labor, social psychology, and zoological psychology. For us, the omission of clinical psychology is certainly the most interesting
International Aspects of School Psychology
33
fact. This is due to the very different approach to mental health. What is known here as depth psychology-based on the Freudian t h e o r y - i s almost completely unknown in the Soviet Union. What we know as school psychology, educational psychology, and certainly educational counseling are comprised in "child and pedagogical psychology." In the fourth year specialization starts and it includes practical training in research methods and developmental diagnosis. Specialization in child and pedagogical psychology is achieved also by special courses and seminars. From the list of 18 specific courses taught this year at Moscow University, two are concerned with speech-psychology of speech and clinical speech pathology. Six courses are concerned with cognitive aspects and one is concerned with methodology; nine are theoretical in nature. Graduation for what we would call school psychology takes five years. Students must defend a graduation thesis and pass state certification examinations. The jobs they are assigned might be in the laboratories of scientific-research institutes and clinics (such as The Institute of Preschool Upbringing, Institute of Defectology, Institute of General and Pedagogical Psychology) and schools, where they would be assistant directors for upbringing, ministries in various scientific departments or in special experimental schools. Those who displayed outstanding scientific ability may go though a postgraduate course which takes three years and is somewhat equivalent to our Ph.D. 2 It seems that the main difference in the training program of Soviet school psychologists, or as they are called, Specialists in Child and Pedagogical Psychology, and the training of American school psychologists, primarily involves stress on the cognitive processes and secondarily stress on the emotional processes. Implications of the Soviet Approach. It seems from the cross-cultural data that there are less behavior problems in the Soviet schools than in western society. Bronfenbrenner (1963) writes: "What impresses this observer, like others before him, about Soviet youngsters, especially those attending schools of the new type, was their 'group behavior.' In their external actions they are well mannered, attentive, and industrious. In informal conversations, they reveal a strong motivation to learn, a readiness to serve their society, and in general, ironically enough, for a culture committed to materialistic philosophy, what can only be described as an idealistic attitude toward life. In keeping with this general orientation, relationships with parents, teachers, and upbringers are those of respectful but affectionate friendships. The discipline of the collective is accepted and regarded as justified, even when severe as judged by western standards [p. 160] ." Bronfenbrenner, in Two Worlds of Childhood, U.S. and U.S.S.R. (1970), presents the collective type of education used in the U.S.S.R. as having numerous advantages. At the Moscow University, in the Department of Pedagogics and Pedagogical Psychology, in the special program of child and pedagogical psychology, there is a course entitled "Relationships in chil2 Gratitude is expressed to Professor Dr. Nina F. Talyzina, head of the Department of Pealagogics and Pedagogical Psychology at Moscow University, who supplied this information.
34
Journal of School Psychology
dren-collective and development of personality," which deals with the special psychological problems in collective education. Would it be possible that the consideration of these approaches could teach us something? The fact that the American culture and the American psychologists stress the emotional aspects of individuals in society has many effects. One consequence of this approach is that many people become "amateur psychologists," quite ready to infer unconscious or hidden motivations to account for all sorts of behavior (Miller, 1969). Valins and Nisbett (1971) give examples of the negative power of the "psychologisation of behavior" and "induced" psychological disturbances. It is always difficult to know whether a special approach to a problem is only a response to a need or whether it provokes some special needs. By reviewing some of the translated Russian professional literature, one finds that the main problems dealt with are cognitive in nature, mainly learning problems. For instance, Lomov (1972), writing about the present and future status and development of psychology in the USSR, has this to say about psychological problems in the schools: "Studies have been made of some of the principles governing the learning of objective knowledge, skills, and practical h a b i t s . . , concrete recommendations, aimed at developing meaningful recall techniques and generalized skills and habits, have been outlined for school children of various ages; and research is being conducted to determine the causes and the ways to overcome failure in schools [p. 336] ." Perhaps the first part of this statement should make us think about the objectives of educational psychology as we know them. The second part could be perhaps closer to our way of looking at school psychology. The problem of failure in the schools seems to be preoccupying the Soviet psychologists. Prokofen (1972) writes: "According to the totals of the 1969-1970 school year, 2.8% of the total number of pupils were grade repeaters. During the year the drop out rate for all grades was 2.5% or 2.3 million persons [p. 92] ." Are these impressive numbers a result of the school curriculum in the Soviet Union or a result of the greater attention given to these problems? Could it be that the greater focus on emotional problems in the school in the United States and the greater focus on cognitive problems in the Soviet Union are not a result of what is actually going on with children, but of a difference in the focus of attention? The Wickman Study of 1935 about attitudes of psychologists and teachers toward behavior problems of children, replicated since then more than ten times, shows that psychologists view severity of the behavior problem somewhat differently than teachers (Ziv, 1970). These differences might be the result of differences in training and in role expectations. FRANCE Considering school psychology in another country, one finds that in France the situation is more compficated because there are two different types of school psychologists: those who work with children from kinder-
International Aspects of School Psychology
35
garten through age 12 and the "orientation counselors," who work on the junior high and high school levels. Their theoretical orientation also is very different from the American one. In a recent paper Riquier (1971) attacks school psychology in France, accusing that it is not faithful to the thought of WaUon. It is amazing to read in this paper that school psychology was founded by WaUon in 1945, and there is absolutely no reference about anything done on this subject in the United States. Riquier herself is astonished that in the formation of school psychologists in 1960 " n o other information about the modern currents of psychology is offered to future psychologists and none of the scientific work done overseas, such as Burlingham, Spitz, Bowlby, to cite only a few, have no right to be presented [p. 26] ." In tracing the historical development of school psychology in France before and after the institution of the school psychology diploma in 1961, she cites the thought tests; almost none known in the United States [p. 28]. The school psychologist has to have five years of teaching experience, but this is more a theoretical expectation of the law than something existing in reality. Then a special diploma given by an institute is required. Other psychologists go through the normal channel of the university to earn "maitrise" (approximately equivalent to our master's degree) in psychology in five years. However, in order to work as a school psychologist, one would have to attend an institute for a special diploma in school psychology. The two things can be done simultaneously, so that in five years one can have both the maitrise and the school psychology diploma. Most French universities differ greatly from one to another and even more greatly from American universities. Most of the professors change the courses they are offering every year or two, and students finishing in different years have a rather different formation. Most of the courses are theoretical, and they certainly go much deeper into the theoretical approach than do American students. The practical aspects are less stressed, and the students are required to do a great deal of reading. Due to the great number of students, classes are huge and the lectures don't allow for much interaction between faculty and the students. (Education is free in France at all levels and there is no selection criteria for admission.) However, laboratories and practical work are organized for small groups, but certainly the theoretical preparation of French psychologists is generally on a higher level than in the United States, and the practical one on a much lower level. The "professional orientors" deal with what we know as vocational guidance in the high school and university levels. They are accepted in special institutes for holding a university degree (approximately equivalent to a B.A.) or for having at least five years of teaching experience. They have to take an entrance examination (based on a bibliography); they study for two years while being paid an average salary. In their program, in addition to courses in child and adolescent psychology, they have a serious program in vocational guidance and a very large practicum. We can see that in France there are really two separate professions: school psychology and vocational guidance. The training of school psychologists involves a very thorough theoretical formation, but in the field they have a rather limited and restricted area of work, which for the most part involves
36
Journal of School Psychology
only testing. The professional orientors have a greater practical formation, and they deal only with the guidance aspects at all levels of education.
GERMANY In Germany the school psychology field is currently in a developmental phase. There are new programs in school psychology at the Universities of Hamburg and Bonn. The training of the school psychologist takes four to five years; some students have training as teachers, but the newest trend is to have them study only psychology and then require only one-half year of teaching experience (mainly teaching psychology in high schools). After obtaining a diploma, the school psychologist works for a year as an assistant to a school psychologist. They are trained in the departments of psychology and the curriculum is rather similar to the American one. The Ph.D. degree requires two more years of study. School psychologists work in small institutes grouping from 5-15 psychologists working in the school problems of a city. Lately, some large schools with 2,000 pupils or more have their own school psychologist. German psychologists, contrary to those we have reviewed until this point, do counseling and psychotherapy mostly with pupils, but also do some counseling with teachers and parents. 3 However, judging from a brochure published by the division of school psychology of the German Psychological Association, the school psychologist should have some additional roles. HOLLAND In Holland in the last ten years there is a great development in school psychology due to important changes in the structure of the educational system (Van den Broek, 1969). The school psychologist and the educational specialist work together on changing school curriculum and generally the school psychologist working alone is seldom found. The diagnostic process in which the school psychologist works alone is not found in the Dutch approach, but it is done according to the team approach. Therefore, they have more and more of what they call "consulting services in the school," in which the school psychologist is one of the members of a team. The school psychologist in Holland is very much involved in research (too much according to Dr. Langeveld of Amsterdam). 4 He does research on the macropsychological level in the schools (as contrasted to the micropsy/6hological aspect in individual work). Among the experimental work in which he is involved is the special "play-learning" classes between kindergarten and the first grade. Teachers are trained by the school psychologist to observe the children's behavior. The great emphasis in research appears also in the 3 Thanks to Professor Dr. H. Thomae from the Psychological Institute of the University of Bonn and to Professor Dr. Reinhard Tausch from the Institute of Psychology of Hamburg University, who supplied this information. 4 Thanks to Professor Dr. Langeveld from the University of Amsterday who supplied his comments on the training and work of school psychologists in Holland.
International Aspects of School Psychology
37
technology of education, the main themes being the teaching of mathematics, use of audio-visual means in teaching, programmed instruction, school television, and language laboratories. Training for the Ph.D. takes six years and the student can have his first degree in either psychology or education. He can make the same choice at the doctoral level, because there is a common theme in these two disciplines, namely specialization in education. We can see that the school psychologist in Holland better fits the role of educational psychologist as we know it in the United States, rather than the role of school psychologist. ISRAEL In Israel school psychology and educational psychology are seen as different aspects of the same discipline. The training of school psychologists stresses both the aspects of practical work in the school setting and the research aspect. Three universities in Israel have special training programs in school psychology at the master's level. This degree is considered a professional degree sufficient to psychologists working in school. School psychologists are employed not by the school systems but by the municipalities. The school psychologist is considered a normal function of the school system and although the situation where each school in Israel has the services of school psychologists available has not yet been attained, it is one of the objectives of the services of educational psychology and counseling in the Ministry of Education. The fact that school psychologists in Israel are not administratively dependent on the school superintendent gives a greater possibility for him to function on a real professional level. Although different approaches to the work of the school psychologist exist in Israel, the predominant model is a modified clinical one. School psychologists work together in an Educational Psychology Center and their number varies as a function of the school population they work with. Each psychologist works with one to three schools and works one or two days in the school. He observes children in the classroom and outside it, has individual or group meetings with children and teachers, and participates in the team meetings of the school. The teams include the superintendent, the school nurse, the educational social worker, and the school counselor. When the team discusses the problems of a particular child, his teacher is invited to participate. In the teams a policy is decided upon and the roles of different participants are prescribed. An important part of school psychologists' work takes place in the Educational Psychology Center. Here they can work as a team, sometimes collaborating on a research project or in applied projects in one school. One such example is the work of the six psychologists of the Central Educational Center in Tel Aviv who worked with six groups of parents at the same time in one school in Tel Aviv (Ziv & Spiegel, 1968). The Center is also a place where group work with parents, children, or teachers is conducted. One important factor in the school psychologist's work in Israel is the existence of the school counselor in most of the Israeli schools. Slowly a
38
Journal of School Psychology
division of work between the two appears: the vocational guidance role becomes more a part of the counselor's work but they both collaborate in working not only with children having learning or emotional difficulties but also with the whole population of children and teachers in the schools. CONCLUSION In conclusion it seems to this author that in the countries he surveyed the role of the school psychologist is defined in a more precise way than in the United States. In the Soviet Union the training and the work are geared toward the cognitive area; in France guidance is a separate profession from school psychology and the theoretical formation is stressed in training; in Holland the school psychologists are more research oriented; in Germany they do counseling and psychotherapy; and in Israel there is an emphasis on preventive action. A study of these approaches, learning from the different experiences, and trying to improve the exchange between school psychologists in the different approaches they are using could be useful to everyone. It would be interesting to know better the French theories of development, their research approaches, and to study the training of their working guidance counselors. Their 20-year-old experience with parent education could certainly be used in the United States. Some approaches of the Soviet psychologists to group education and their cognitive approach to learning in school could also help. The Dutch research experience in teaching methodology in addition to its work with preschool children could provide data and fruitful ideas in similar types of work. The special programs of Israeli school psychologists, the type of team work they are using, could be implemented, or at least experimented with. An International Conference of School Psychologists may be a valuable learning experience for our profession.
REFERENCES Adamson, W. C. A school mental health program: Development and design, Community Mental Health Journal, 1968, 9, 459-460. Auerbach, A. B. Parents learn through discussion: Principles and practices of parent group education. New York: Wiley & Sons, 1968. Bronfenbrenner, A. B. Upbringing in collective settings in Switzerland and the USSR. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Psychology, 1963, 1, 159-161. FlaveU, J. H. The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. Princeton, New Jersey: Van Nostrand, 1963. Herron, W. G. Training school psychologists to do psychotherapy. Psychology in the Schools, 1966, 3, 48-51. Lomov, S. Present status and future development of psychology in USSR and in the light of decision of the 29th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Soviet Psychology, 972, 10 (9), 329-358. McDaniel, L. Y., & Ahr, A. E. The school psychologist as a resource person initiating and conducting in-service teacher education. Psychology in the Schools, 1965, 2, 220-224. Mackey, R. A., & Hassler, F. R. Group consultations with school personnel. Mental Hygiene, 1966, 50, 416-420. M/ller, G. Psychology as a means of promoting human welfare. American Psychologist, 1969, 24, 1063-1075. Piaget, J. Le Developement du Jugement Moral Chez L "enfant. Paris: P.U.F., 1932.
International Aspects of School Psychology
39
Piaget, J. Le Developement de L 'intelligence Chez L 'enfant. Paris: P.U.F., 1936. Piaget, J. La Perception du Reel Chez L 'enfant. Paris: P.U.F., 1937. Prokofev, M. A. The school and its problem. Soviet Education, 1972, 19 (2), 35-55. Reiily, D. H. Goals and roles of school psychology: A community based model. Journel of School Psychology, 1969, 7, 35-37. Riquier, M. Le psychologic scolaire est-elle fidele a la pensee de Wallon. Psychologie Scolaire, 1971,8, 15-41. Silverman, H. L School psychology: Divergent role conceptualization. Psychology in the Schools, 1969, 6, 266-271. Starkman, S. The professional model: Paradox in school psychology. American Psychologist, 1966, 21, 807-808. Trow, W. C. The future of school psychologist by extrapolation. Psychology in the Schools, 1966, 3, 131-139. Valins, S., & Nisbett, R. E. Attribution processes in the development and treatment of emotional disturbances. In E. E. Yones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes o f behavior. Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press, 1971. Van den Brock, P. La psychologic scolaire aux Pays Bas au cours des dix dernieres annees. La psychologie scolaire, 1969, 6, 45-52. Wolman, T. G. Implications of social change for school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 1967, 4, 68-70. Ziv. A., & Spiegel, Y. Une ecole de parents en Israel. Le groupe familial, 1968, 40, 52-66. Ziv, A. Children's behavior problems as viewed by teachers, psychologists, and children. Child Development, 1970, 41,871-879. Avner Ziv Associate Professor of Psychology Tel Aviv University, Bar Ilan University Tel Aviv, Israel Received: June 15, 1973 Revision Received: August 20, 1973