Contextualizing Diversity in a Study of Educational Psychology Course Syllabi for Preservice Teachers

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to conduct a content analysis of educational psychology course syllabi for courses taken by preservice teachers to determine how the course descriptions and objectives compare for diversity. A content analysis of educational psychology syllabi (N = 25) from colleges and universities mostly (96% or 24 of the 25 syllabi) in the United States was conducted for this study. While there was generally consensus among this sample of syllabi of what topics were covered as part of content knowledge course objectives, there was a divergence in emphasis on diversity as well as only one syllabus that directly addressed controversies in educational psychology. The word diversity appeared in 28% of the course overviews/descriptions in this sample. This study highlights the importance of autoethnographic practices for diversity in educational psychology. Examples of historically underrepresented scholars in psychology are summarized for inclusion in educational psychology courses for preservice teachers as a way to address representation.

1. Introduction

This study adds to the research literature on the role of the syllabus in survey courses on educational psychology for undergraduate and graduate students in initial teacher licensure programs in the United States. This study highlights the need for autoethnographic studies to address change and continuity in the representation of educational psychology theories and practices. A sample (N = 25) of educational psychology course syllabi from colleges and universities are analyzed for implications in how these courses are structured, what is emphasized, and what is communicated to preservice teachers via the syllabus as itself being a pedagogical tool. Themes were derived from word frequencies of the syllabi in the aggregate. Discussion of implications is contextualized based on the syllabi overviews, learning objectives, and related information as derived from word frequencies, term-to-term correlations, and a qualitative comparison across the sample. This study provides an additional foundation for the importance of autoethnographic practice in educational psychology.

2. Background and rationale

Some of the literature has identified challenges in the implementation of culturally responsive pedagogy in terms of some teachers focusing too much on deficit models [1]. Culturally relevant pedagogy is the adaptation of curriculum and the teaching of that curriculum to diverse learners [2]. Course syllabi can be a way to gauge trends in how concepts and skills are presented to preservice teachers. As such, the syllabus can be a way to guide students away from deficit model perception. The syllabus is an important document for all courses in higher education institutions [3]. It is the primary, central document that communicates requirements, expectations, and policies for the course [4]. Some students rely on the course syllabus to determine whether they will enroll in the course, especially if it is an elective [5]. For courses in educational psychology, the syllabus may serve a role beyond its essential function in other disciplines because of the main audience of educational psychology courses are preservice teachers—in initial licensure programs—who are learning pedagogical strategies. As such, the syllabus in educational psychology courses is itself a teaching tool for fostering inclusive practices in teaching and learning [6, 7]. Considering the essential role of educational psychology in teacher education and the necessity to effectively communicate the principles and strategies of teaching and learning that training in educational psychology provides, researchers have suggested the importance of documenting the role of educational psychology from multiple perspectives [8, 9, 10]. One of the ways to do this is to analyze educational psychology courses via the course syllabus. This is important for identifying a baseline of what preservice teachers are expected to know and what skills they should have by the end of a course in educational psychology, and this study will provide a basis for program conceptualization, topic standardization and differentiation, as well as potential for program improvement.

There is a paucity of research on educational psychology course syllabi in the United States. There has been a study of preservice teacher perceptions of educational psychology syllabi in Spain [11]. That research study found that preservice teachers who participated in their study “attributed greater importance to syllabus topics related to socio-emotional development and teaching roles in the classroom. Theoretical topics, such as conceptual frameworks for development and learning, were less rated” ([11], p. 81). This suggests that there is a need for examining syllabi, among other components of educational psychology curricula, for how the practitioner experience is represented since this seems to be of substantial importance to preservice teachers. Alvarez and colleagues [11] also found that the components on theory which tended to form a large part of educational psychology curriculum in their sample of participants who seemed to perceive the theories in their course as needing updated. Another study on educational psychology syllabi was conducted in Malta with in-service teachers [12]. The earlier study conducted by Borg and Falzon [12] had similar results though more focused on assessment process rather than content and focused only on an honors section of educational psychology.

There are related studies in the United States, but not specifically on syllabi of survey courses in educational psychology for preservice teachers. For example, there was a study that approaches the topic of psychology course syllabi analysis in the United States, but it was for a multicultural course in a counseling psychology program [13], not a course in educational psychology. Another study analyzed doctoral level syllabi of courses on the history of educational psychology [14]. The study conducted by Merced and colleagues [14] found that the syllabi in their sample had on average five course objectives that could be improved through rephrasing for measurability. They also found that the syllabi were vague with a focus on “foundational competencies” rather than on outcomes that promoted measurable advanced skills.

There have been studies that analyzed course syllabi from courses on general psychology [15, 16]. There have also been studies that analyze course syllabi in related disciplines but, again, not specifically on courses in educational psychology for preservice teachers (e.g., [17, 18, 19, 20]). Most found that there was less of an emphasis on dynamic critical thinking skills assessed through measurable outcomes at the higher level of Bloom’s taxonomy and instead focused on what Merced and colleagues [14] called “foundational competencies.” In an analysis of general psychology syllabi, a research team suggested that their sample of syllabi were “disproportionately learner-centered on almost all of the factors assessed. In addition, there were moderate to strong associations among learner-centered factors, syllabus length, and use of images in syllabi” ([16], p. 6). They noted that there has been a trend in the past 20 years that general psychology syllabi have included more “learner-centered” or constructivist pedagogy. This factor can be important for culturally responsive pedagogy. Some studies also reference the importance of a course syllabus as a factor in the study of K-12 and college courses (e.g., [5, 21, 22]) which support the findings of Alvarez and colleagues [11] in their case study in that students placed substantial importance on the syllabus for how they approach a course.

Other than the study by Alvarez and colleagues [11] on preservice teacher perceptions of educational psychology syllabi in Spain, the research study that is closest to the present topic on educational psychology courses in the United States was a study by Miller and colleagues [23] that analyzed the syllabi of school psychology courses from across the United States. While their research is certainly relevant to the present study, it is not focused on educational psychology courses for preservice teachers. Their study focused on school psychology syllabi in courses taken by preservice school psychologists, finding that the assessment methods used in those courses were largely unchanged over the previous two decades which suggested the potential need for reviewing assessment strategies. The findings that there has perhaps been very little change in school psychology courses [23] and the findings that suggested a trend toward learner-centered approaches in general psychology courses [16], indicate a growing interest in the course syllabus as an essential component of pedagogy to study. Given the gap in the literature on analyzing educational psychology syllabi of courses for preservice teachers and the related findings of Miller and colleagues [23] and Richmond and colleagues [16], there is a need to study educational psychology courses for diversity and inclusion practices in the course content as well as assessment strategies used. This highlights that there is a gap in the research literature on educational psychology course syllabi in the United States. This present study addresses this gap and calls for additional research on this topic by providing a qualitative study of a sample of educational psychology course syllabi from public and private colleges and universities from across the United States. Through a content analysis of the syllabi, implications are identified and discussed for how educational psychology courses are presented to students through the syllabus.

3. Study design

3.1 Materials and method

A content analysis of educational psychology syllabi (N = 25) from colleges and universities was conducted for this study. The content analysis strategy used is based on comparing documents for themes [24, 25]. The theoretical framework that informs this content analysis is based on culturally responsive pedagogy with emphasis in humanizing pedagogy [2, 26] to “connect the autobiographical and personal to the cultural, social, and political” ([27], p. 254). In this study, humanizing pedagogy is used as a framework for analyzing the course syllabi for how students might potentially interface with the curriculum through the assessment methods listed or “see” themselves or groups with whom students might historically associate for representation in the curriculum.

Voyant was the software package used for supporting analysis of the course overviews, descriptions, and course objectives listed on each syllabus (see Welsh’s [28] review of Voyant software in its application for conducting content analysis). The software-aided portion of the analysis combined all the course overviews/descriptions from each syllabus into one document for determining vocabulary density, readability index, word frequencies, and term correlations. Documents were selected using modified thematic keyword online search for qualitative analysis [24]. The readability index is a measure of how difficult a text is to read. The methodology used to select the samples was online search using thematic keywords, screening documents for thematic relevance, and including those that were representative of the theme both geographically and by content area. This study compared a selection of publicly available syllabi from accredited public and private non-profit colleges and universities.

3.2 Research questions

The research questions guiding this study are: What are the common themes across the syllabi for educational psychology courses in colleges and universities in the United States? What themes and topics are featured in the syllabi? Are there apparent similarities and differences in the course overviews/descriptions and what are the implications?

4. Findings and discussion

4.1 Descriptive details summary of syllabi

The syllabi (N = 25) analyzed in this study are from private colleges/universities (n = 9) and public colleges/universities (n = 16). Of the 16 public institutions in this sample, 11 are 4-year universities, 4 are 2-year community colleges and one is a public four-year institution in Canada. For comparison between undergraduate initial teacher licensure programs and graduate initial teacher licensure programs, five of the 25 are graduate level programs for students with a baccalaureate degree seeking initial licensure plus a master’s degree. Of these five, three are public institutions and two are private institutions. Syllabi included in this study are addressed pseudonymously for reasons of privacy. See Table 1 for descriptive details.

Syllabus	Institution type (all are accredited, non-profit)	Program type (all are for initial licensure programs)	State/location	Syllabus length (page-count)	Learning objectives (number listed)	Topics of study (number listed)	Exams or quizzes required
1	Public university	Graduate	WA	10	6	9	No
2	Public university	Graduate	NM	6	15	12	No
3	Public university	Graduate	CO	13	9	8	Yes
4	Private university	Graduate	TN	19	6	7	No
5	Private university	Graduate	IN	5	10	10	No
6	Public university	Undergraduate	KY	9	11	No course calendar with topics listed	Yes
7	Public university	Undergraduate	WI	3	5	No course calendar with topics listed	Yes
8	Public university	Undergraduate	TX	9	4	13	Yes
9	Public university	Undergraduate	TX	7	10	15	Yes
10	Public university	Undergraduate	TX	7	9	10	Yes
11	Public university	Undergraduate	MI	7	4	No course calendar with topics listed	Yes
12	Public university	Undergraduate	VA	3	None specifically listed	16	Yes
13	Public university	Undergraduate	CO	18	3	No course calendar with topics listed	Yes (“take-home essay exams”)
14	Private university	Undergraduate	WI	12	10	No course calendar with topics listed	Yes
15	Private university	Undergraduate	MN	8	6	11	Yes
16	Private university	Undergraduate	LA	9	9	9	Yes
17	Private university	Undergraduate	NY	20	6	14	No
18	Private university	Undergraduate	RI	9	4	13	Yes (“take-home exams”)
19	Private university	Undergraduate	DC	5	17	No course calendar with topics listed	Yes
20	Private university	Undergraduate	TX	5	8	No course calendar with topics listed	No
21	Public community college (2-year)	Undergraduate	MO	8	13	16	Yes
22	Public community college (2-year)	Undergraduate	IA	3	16	No course calendar with topics listed	No
23	Public Community College (2-Year)	Undergraduate	NJ	8	5	15	Yes
24	Public community college (2-year)	Undergraduate	CT	3	7	5	Yes
25	Public university in Canada	Undergraduate	ON	8	6	17	No

Table 1.

Descriptive details of educational psychology course syllabi.

Note: Syllabi are referenced pseudonymously.

Frequencies of items such as syllabus length, number of topics of study, and whether exams and quizzes are used and form the basis for determinations about assessment as an essential theme in educational psychology. Of the five graduate initial licensure programs in this sample, only one (2%) had required exams and/or quizzes. This descriptive statistic is inverted when looking at the undergraduate initial licensure programs in which 16 (80%) of the syllabi require tests and/or quizzes. All the course syllabi listed a required combination of papers, projects, and discussion assignments. The average syllabus length was just under 9 pages (median = 8, mode = 9). The average number of learning objectives was 8 (median = 7, mode = 6, highest number = 17, lowest number = 3). The average number of topics of study was 12 (median = 12, mode = 9, highest number = 17, lowest number = 5) of the 17 syllabi that included a detailed course schedule with topics and assignments listed. Topics of study were generally consistent across syllabi and the learning objectives were generally consistent as well with action verbs such as “discuss,” “apply,” “analyze,” “evaluate,” “explore,” and “understand,” among similar other action verbs starting each learning objective aligned with course content and skills. Those syllabi that listed a required field experience as part of the course were more practitioner oriented in that the assignments focused on applying theory to practice whereas the courses without a field experience component focused more on the theories of teaching and learning and going in depth learning about educational psychological theories through discussion, papers, and related projects.

4.2 Analysis of syllabi course overviews

After reading each syllabus, this researcher initially used manual process to determine themes and coded the course overview/description from each syllabus, and then used an automated process for determining word-count frequencies. Themes were determined based on keyword frequency in the course overview/description. These keywords (n = 14) include by order of frequency from most frequent to least frequent: learning, development, educational, psychology, theories, teaching, students, motivation, research, understanding, process, knowledge, assessment, and classroom. The top three keywords most seen in the course overviews/descriptions from the syllabi were learning, development, and educational. The word course was technically second in frequency but that is removed from this analysis as it was a standardized heading in course syllabi and not a content word.

There are about 2430 words (within which there were 677 unique word forms) total when combining the course overviews from all 25 syllabi in this sample. The top fifteen word-frequencies in the course overviews of the syllabi combined were: learning (n = 71); course (n = 52); development (n = 31); educational (n = 29); psychology (n = 27); teaching (n = 24); theories (n = 24); students (n = 16); motivation (n = 14); social (n = 12); research (n = 11); education (n = 10); process (n = 10); understanding (n = 10); assessment (n = 9). The vocabulary density was .279 and the readability index was 17.154, which indicates the text is at the level of a college graduate.

When comparing terms in course objectives for correlations. Results most notable for this study include strongly positive correlation coefficients (r = 1) between terms such as “application” with “pupil,” “democracy” with “justice,” “agency” with “language,” “developing” with “understandings,” “developing” with “vocabulary,” “develops” with “supports,” “diverse” with “interests,” and “strategies” with “understanding.” These strong correlations suggest the course overviews are emphasizing that preservice teachers in these courses will be able to develop and apply theories to practice so that they and their future students have agency to achieve the learning targets.

The main theme that emerged was assessment. Since a survey course on educational psychology is focused on preparing teachers, the keyword of assessment—although relatively low in frequency in the course descriptions—was frequently listed as one of the topics in the syllabi that included a course schedule with topics list which was 68% of this sample. When considering the top three keywords by frequency, they each are reinforced through assessment. This finding is consistent with another study’s finding that formative assessment, specifically, is an essential tool in educational psychology [29]. Therefore, assessment was determined to be a theme in this study and measured by recording whether the syllabus listed required exams and/or quizzes. The number of objectives the syllabi listed was recorded in Table 1 as also reinforcing the theme of assessment.

Another theme that emerged was diversity and inclusion. The word diversity appeared seven times (28%) in the course overviews/descriptions. The word inclusion did not appear in any of the course overviews/descriptions, but it was in most of the topic lists of the syllabi either directly stated as inclusion or inclusive practice or included as part of a topic on diversity or listed as a topic on individual and group differences. It may be inferred that diversity and inclusion are synonymous for the purposes of this specific analysis. Also of note, the word controversial was in one of the syllabi’s course descriptions—Syllabus 16—suggesting that the course at that institution would directly address debates in the field of educational psychology instead of problematically presenting material as static. Part of the course description read: “This course also emphasizes several contemporary educational psychology issues of a controversial/debatable nature that lend themselves to examination via a point-counterpoint or pro-con dialectical process” (Syllabus 16). This was the only syllabus in this sample to address controversy in the field of educational psychology. It was also one of the few syllabi to not require tests or quizzes as part of the assessment structure of the course. This would support the constructivist method with which Syllabus 16 seems to be predicated. Constructivism tends to not require tests and quizzes and instead relies largely on discussion-based and project-based learning strategies [30].

All the syllabi in this sample that included a course schedule with list of topics of study were generally consistent in including theories and frameworks of Vygotsky [31, 32], Piaget [33], Bandura [34], and included topics of lifespan development, cognitive processes, behavioral processes, intelligence constructs, and individual and group differences, among other topics in parallel across these syllabi. The framing or emphasis of these topics varied as did the amount of time for each of the topics, but the list of topics themselves were consistent among the 17 (68% of the) syllabi that included a detailed course calendar that listed topics and assignments. When considering the theme of diversity and inclusion, 28% addressed this topic directly within the course overview/description. Most included this in a cultural process topic or across multiple topics in the course schedule section. Although the course overview/description suggests what will be most emphasized in the course, survey courses such as educational psychology for preservice teachers include many topics, and it is in the list of topics and readings that matters more than the overview/description. As such, diversity and inclusion or cultural perspectives in educational psychology were featured in at least one topic in more than 90% of the syllabi in this sample.

It is interesting that one of the syllabi directly addressed the concept of controversy and debate in the course overview/description. Emphasizing discussion of controversy in the field of educational psychology was highly unusual in this sample of syllabi. Possible reasons for the topic of controversy being an outlier may be because of this course being a survey course and likely the only educational psychology course that preservice teachers will take so there is little time to address controversies in psychology. This consideration of time as a factor may result in the course presenting what has become a standard list of topics on educational psychology that are deemed most influential by the instructor and leave out discussion of controversy as this could take a substantial amount of time. Teaching about general psychology via case studies on controversial topics has been shown to be effective in generating and maintaining student engagement in learning [35]. However, the subfield of educational psychology is usually focused on teaching practical pedagogical strategies—that are informed by the research literature—to teachers for their K-12 classrooms. Therefore, direct instruction is more efficient, and controversial topics or the teaching of controversies within the field may be viewed as a distraction or as potentially counterproductive. This is especially the case in a survey course which is likely the only course in educational psychology that preservice teachers take in their teacher education program.

A related issue to partially explain a reluctance to directly address controversy is also in what Kaplan [36] and others have discussed as a focus on quantitative methodology and the positivist paradigm that have historically refereed the entire field of psychology: “the perception that the epistemological assumptions guiding their research are incompatible with the assumptions and corresponding standards that serve to screen out [methodologically divergent studies]” ([36], p. 2). While this has been changing across multiple subfields of psychology, and the field of psychology has a robust qualitative research tradition, there has also been critique of narrow cultural influence on the field of psychology that has historically tended to emphasize the positivist paradigm, though this itself is also debated and without consensus [37, 38, 39]. Also, Hwang and colleagues [40] specifically critiqued what they call Kantian Eurocentrism—and its historical emphasis on quantitative primacy—that has dominated the development of psychology as a field. Nevertheless, research teams have affirmed the importance of the quantitative paradigm in educational psychology for its usefulness as a tool to assist in challenging process of dispelling “neuromyths” [41].

Diversifying psychology methodologically and in multicultural viewpoints can be important for preservice teachers so they may have a better understanding of multiple vantage points and be better prepared for teaching in a pluralistic society [42, 43]. That conceptual goal starts with the syllabus [6]. This study’s sample of course syllabi suggests that syllabi in survey courses on educational psychology nearly all address individual and group differences as a topic of study and most address diversity within that topic and some of these syllabi address diversity and multicultural perspectives as additional topics of study and linked to the course objectives. The course learning objectives were also largely in parallel with each other, though there were some notable outliers in how qualitative or quantitative research was emphasized and if the course objectives emphasized outcomes in psychological science literacy or social-emotional interaction skills (e.g., Syllabus 11 in comparison to Syllabus 13). Some syllabi emphasized psychological science throughout the course objectives and that the course readings would mostly be research studies (e.g., Syllabus 11) while a couple other syllabi (e.g., Syllabus 13) emphasized social-emotional skills such as empathy and application of these skills to field placements. Most syllabi demonstrated a balanced approach to course objectives between developing psychological scientific understanding and social-emotional professionalism and between theory and practice across several major educational psychological theories and either their historical implications for classroom practice and/or their contemporary applications and what historical and recent research suggests for practice.

Students can benefit from faculty regularly reviewing their syllabi and updating the syllabus to include multiple perspectives in both psychological research methodology and in multicultural conceptualizations of psychology that include recent research. In the related field of school psychology, a research team found in a survey of members of the National Association of School Psychologists that “Overall, only about 11% of school psychologists reported that they were knowledgeable or very knowledgeable of social justice as part of school psychology practice” ([44], p. 13). While their study was about school psychologists and not preservice teachers or instructors of educational psychology, the field of school psychology is related. This further highlights the importance for instructors of survey courses on educational psychology to address the field from multiple methodological perspectives and foster discussion of psychological constructs across time and place. Preservice teachers should have knowledge and skills by the end of their educational psychology course in how to identify and summarize theories of teaching and learning, articulate the purposes of both quantitative and qualitative methodologies in addition to understanding how to apply a theory with its research foundations both historically and contemporaneously in classroom practice [10].

When considering the theme of assessment, the keywords of learning, development, and educational were most frequently seen in the course overviews/descriptions. This makes sense when considering studies such as one conducted by Leenknecht and colleagues [29] that have suggested that learning and development in schools is predicated on assessment—specifically formative assessment. Other studies have also suggested the essential importance of assessment in K-12 teaching and learning (e.g., [45, 46, 47]). Therefore, this finding is congruent with the assumption of the foundational role of assessment in educational psychology.

Only four of the 16 (25%) syllabi for the undergraduate courses did not have exams and quizzes as part of the assessment method. This prompts the theme of psychological paradigms—notably positivism and constructivism, as the syllabi seemed to bifurcate along these two paradigms in terms of assessment structure. Although this statistic inverts for the graduate course syllabi sample—four of the five (80%) do not require tests or quizzes—it is notable that the requirement of tests and quizzes suggests a positivist paradigm in assessment is the majority in this sample for the undergraduate courses. The use of exams and quizzes has substantial support in the research literature as formative and summative assessment tools that effectively promote and support student learning (e.g., [48, 49, 50]), so the observation from this study of syllabi that include exams and quizzes as part of the assessment is consistent with much of the research. Constructivist approaches that are project-based and discussion-based are also popular and have support in research literature [51, 52, 53]. Therefore, the combination of constructivism and direct instruction with objective exams and quizzes make sense for a survey course [54], which is consistent with what is observed in the syllabi in this study’s sample.

While all the syllabi in this sample have a combination of these approaches to assessment—quantitative and qualitative assessment modalities—most syllabi in this sample have listed required exams and quizzes as summative assessment tools that are substantial percentages of the course grade. Of the four syllabi that suggest a mostly constructivist approach to assessment—relying on discussions, projects, and essays/papers without any tests or quizzes—one was especially constructivist because of its unique highlighting of the topic of controversies in the field of psychology. This set Syllabus 16 apart from all the other syllabi. It emphasized discussion-based approaches to controversies in educational psychology. As a pedagogical approach, discussion (and inferring potential debates) of controversies in the field was in only one of the syllabi in this sample. When considering a previous study [7], the use of that language in the syllabus was itself indirectly teaching students that educational psychology is not a static field but one of iterative evolution. In either case, whether the course requires tests and quizzes or not, educational psychology courses are important components of teacher education that improve preservice teachers’ knowledge and skills in pedagogy and in neuroscience literacy, but course curriculum should be regularly reviewed by their faculty to ensure a mix of historical and recent research studies are included in the readings as part of the curriculum [41, 55].

4.3 Analysis of the syllabi course objectives

There were 3034 words (within which there were 690 unique word forms) total when combining the course objectives from all 25 syllabi in this sample. The top fifteen word-frequencies in the course objectives from the syllabi combined were: learning (n = 89); theories (n = 37); student (n = 32); development (n = 31); educational (n = 29); students (n = 28); teaching (n = 26); classroom (n = 23); course (n = 23); identify (n = 22); describe (n = 17); motivation (n = 17); assessment (n = 16); instruction (n = 16); cognitive (n = 15). The vocabulary density was .227 and the readability index was 17.329, which indicates the text is at the level of a college graduate. The terms student and students were not combined because their use as singular and plural seemed intentional in the syllabi. The context in each case seemed indicative of emphasis on differentiation where use of singular student suggested specific differentiation (e.g., learning styles theory) while use of plural students suggested whole group instructional context.

While the syllabi in this sample are mostly consistent in the topics of study covered, their different approaches in assessment of student learning are notable in relation to the differences in what was emphasized within the course learning objectives. Assessment methods matter to students, especially those who use the syllabus to choose which section to enroll in and navigate the course throughout the term. The method of assessment can affect students’ initial interest in the course and their situational interest in course material during the semester [56]. In a study of what influences undergraduate students’ elective course selections, Chaturapruek et al. [5] found that the syllabus can influence students’ enrollment decisions. One of the first-year undergraduate students in their study stated: “I’ll start off on [the university’s central course catalog], look at the description of it, and then go back to previous years because you can usually see the syllabus so I feel like that’s helpful in seeing like, what sorts of assignments are and stuff” (as cited in [5], p. 9). The implication is that the syllabus is perhaps the single most important document for a course in that it serves a purpose before, during, and after students are enrolled in the course. Some students use the publicly posted syllabus to determine classes to take, consult the syllabus throughout the term for the assignments and class meetings schedule, course policies, grading scale and procedures, et cetera. If a student transfers universities, the syllabus can often be part of the course transfer evaluation process.

As seen in Table 2, the top fifteen words by frequency were largely shared across the course overviews and course objectives though their relative order differed in many cases suggesting different emphasis. Learning was notable the first most frequent word across both the aggregate course overviews and aggregate course objectives. After that the order of emphasis diverged, but the words themselves were shared in both areas. For example, development was the third most frequent word in the course overviews while it was fourth in frequency in course objectives. Notably, the word assessment is fifteenth in frequency in the course overviews while it is thirteenth in frequency in course objectives. The word diversity is not in the top fifteen words by frequency in either category.

Course overview/description word (frequency)	Course objectives word (frequency)
Learning (71)	Learning (89)
Course (52)	Theories (37)
Development (31)	Student (32)
Educational (29)	Development (31)
Psychology (27)	Educational (29)
Teaching (24)	Students (28)
Theories (24)	Teaching (26)
Students (16)	Classroom (23)
Motivation (14)	Course (23)
Social (12)	Identify (22)
Research (11)	Describe (17)
Education (10)	Motivation (17)
Process (10)	Assessment (16)
Understanding (10)	Instruction (16)
Assessment (9)	Cognitive (15)

Table 2.

Top fifteen words by frequency in course overview/description compared to course objectives.

When comparing terms in course objectives for correlations. Results most notable for this study include strongly positive correlation coefficients (r = 1) between terms such as “assumptions” with “contexts,” “planning” with “professional,” “academic” with “methodology,” “active” with “solving,” “age” with “inclusive,” “analysis” with “relationship,” “approach” with “exceptionality,” “approach” with “inclusive,” “background” with “psychological,” “characterize” with “empirical,” “communicate” with “diverse,” “influences” with “mastery,” “theorists” with “varying,” “assessing” with “cognition,” and “processing” with “psychological.” These strong correlations suggest the course objectives that emphasize differentiation through problem-solving terminology and related phrases. It is also notable that these term-to-term correlations tend to more likely include the words diversity and inclusion in action verb statements and more frequently than what was seen in the course overviews. Assessment also features notably in the action verb form assessing with its strong correlation (r = 1) with the word cognition in the aggregate course objectives.

These results suggest the importance of inclusive pedagogy as being a process of curriculum planning. The syllabus is a central document that conveys the messages of the course. Diversity, then, is reflected in the course syllabus. As such, teacher educators in an educational psychology course are in an important role to convey why diversity matters in schools through the lenses of educational psychology. Local culture should be reflected in some way in course curriculum while designing curriculum that avoids the trap of the deficit model [1]. In designing educational psychology curricula for preservice teachers that addresses diversity as a generative model—part of which has been described as a humanizing pedagogy [2, 26]—this can help teacher educators in providing representative educational psychology that avoids “hierarchy of oppression” traps that Gorski and Goodman [57] observed of the deficit model seen in a sample of multicultural courses they examined. By examining course syllabi, gaps might be identified so that deficit models may be proactively removed so that the curriculum in educational psychology is representative. Vygotsky, Piaget, and other major figures in educational psychology should be included in course curriculum, too. It is important to consider representation in educational psychology, especially as preservice teachers may only take one course in educational psychology in their entire degree program.

4.4 Limitations and future research directions

This content analysis of educational psychology course syllabi from across the United States—and one syllabus from Canada for the purpose of comparison for a potential future study—presents qualitatively substantial observations, but this is not generalizable. This study focuses on what is listed in the syllabi. This current study includes syllabi from 18 states and the District of Columbia, as well as one syllabus from Ontario, Canada. Some syllabi in this sample are from different institutions within the same state. This was a convenience sample of publicly available syllabi on college and university websites. While these syllabi are from after 2010, they do not include syllabi from after 2019. As such, findings from this study are not generalizable. A future study could include only syllabi from after 2020 to emphasize the most recent syllabi. Nevertheless, this study provides insights into what some educational psychology syllabi for preservice teachers emphasized between 2010 and 2019 to establish a baseline for a potential future study to compare syllabi after 2020.

The syllabi that were included for this study prompts discussion of how educational psychology was presented to preservice teachers in the syllabus during the 2010s. Even though these are not generalizable, this study offers a conversation prompt to highlight a research methodology in “personal experience as an important source of knowledge in and of itself, as well as a source of insight into cultural experience” ([27], p. 254). In doing so, this study contextualizes the importance of anecdotal insights in educational psychology that can foster conversations in pedagogical practice. This provides an additional foundation for future autoethnographic research into educational psychology for preservice teachers.

The use of Voyant software for computer-assisted content analysis to estimate vocabulary density, readability index, word frequencies, and term frequency correlations is limited in that for this study the course overviews and objectives were each analyzed in a combined corpus. The overview from each syllabus was placed in a single document and analyzed as a whole. This was done to give an overall perspective of what was emphasized in the sample. Likewise, the list of course objectives from each syllabus was placed in a single document and analyzed as a whole. This was done for the purpose of determining overall descriptive numbers and term frequency correlations.

Furthermore, these were combined in an intentional order for both the combined document of course overviews and combined document of course objectives: the first five are from graduate courses which were listed further in order by public and private institutional status; and the next 20 are from undergraduate courses which were listed further in order by public 4-year universities, private 4-year universities, and then public 2-year community colleges. Therefore, even though each of the course overviews and course objectives were placed in one document for analysis, they were analyzed in order of course level (graduate or undergraduate) and by institutional type (public or private 4-year and 2-year community college) so that relative frequencies in document segments could be interpreted.

For term frequency correlations, Voyant was used. The correlation coefficient is calculated by comparing the relative frequencies of terms. A coefficient that approaches 1 indicates that values correlate positively, they rise and fall together. A coefficient that approaches −1 indicates that values correlate negatively, frequencies rise for one term as it drops for the other. Coefficients that approach 0 indicate little correlation, positive or negative. Vocabulary density means the ratio of the number of words to the number of unique words in the text.

This study complements the research literature on the role of the course syllabus in student perception and efficacy, provides another example of how an exploratory comparative content analysis can be conducted on this topic, and addresses a gap in the literature on analysis of educational psychology course syllabi in the United States. Future research could include a quantitatively systematic approach, or a larger qualitative or mixed methods study modeled on this qualitative approach. Future research could also include a systematic sample of syllabi from undergraduate and graduate initial teacher licensure programs from every state in the United States.

5. Conclusion and recommendations

This study of educational psychology course syllabi highlights the importance of self-assessment as a foundational concept in teacher education. It also highlights the importance of diversity and inclusion for multicultural points of view on educational psychology. The work of Vygotsky and Piaget are featured in each of the syllabi evaluated in this study but considering that the word diversity appeared in 28% of the course overviews/descriptions it makes sense to highlight the importance of these concepts when revising course syllabi for surveys of educational psychology for preservice teachers. As such, autoethnographic practices could be applied to educational psychology survey courses to foster diverse representation of scholarly voices in the curriculum. One of the ways to do this in the United States, for example, in a survey course on educational psychology is to include culturally responsive pedagogy.

Recommendations for implementing diverse perspectives in educational psychology survey courses for preservice teachers through a culturally responsive lens include teaching about the twentieth century history of psychologists such as Mamie Phipps Clark (see [58]), Ruth Winifred Howard (see [59]), and Albert Sidney Beckham (see [60]) on the leadership of African American psychologists, Carolyn Lewis Attneave (see [61]) on American Indigenous psychology, Evelyn Hooker (see [62, 63]) on LGBTQ+ psychology, and Reiko Homma-True (see [64, 65]) on feminist psychology and the psychology of minority groups in pluralistic societies. With inclusive autoethnographic practice in the educational psychology curriculum, culturally relevant pedagogy can achieve its goal. This should avoid the deficit model problem [1]. It is important that preservice teachers take a course in educational psychology to learn pedagogical strategies and the historical and contemporary contexts of K-12 teaching and learning that will inform their practice as teachers. Course syllabi should be regularly updated for a combination of historical and contemporary readings that present students with multiple points of view both methodologically and culturally so that they may have an informed understanding of educational psychology as a field and its implications for K-12 teaching practice.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.