1

Psi Chi chapter best practices: 10 criteria , Mercedes McCormick & CASE, the Committee to Advance Student Excellence **

Since its formation in 1929, has had the mission to promote “excellence” in its member students, faculty, alumni—as noted in the induction ceremony for new members (Hogan & Takooshian, 2004). Why are so many Psi Chi chapters falling into inactivity? Like all honor societies today, the 1,100 Psi Chi chapters in the USA vary widely in two ways: (1) Their internal health, from highly active to moribund, (2) Their external context, from highly supportive to adverse. Do these two features relate? Among the 60 Psi Chi chapters in Greater New York, the region is blessed with a core of extraordinary faculty advisors who work closely with one another, and share a heart and talent for promoting student excellence--a close-knit "Committee to Advance Student Excellence" (CASE, pictured below). (Indeed, many of these 8 Psi Chi advisors were past national officers, and two were elected to national office in the past two years.) In 2010, CASE successfully submitted a proposal to Psi Chi for a Thelma Hunt Research Grant to empirically study "Psi Chi best practices" to study this question: Why do some chapters endure and thrive while others flounder or dissolve? What are common problems that chapter officers face at 1,100 U.S. campuses, and how can these be overcome? Are these problems more internal to the chapter or external to the school?

METHOD. Since its launch in 1996, the goal of the Psi Chi Thelma Hunt Awards has been to encourage Psi Chi members to apply their research skills to illumine timely policy issues that will benefit Psi Chi and its mission of excellence (Takooshian, 1996). The original plan of the two CASE conveners, Harold Takooshian and Mercedes McCormick, was a three-step study: (1) Qualitative: First, a series of focus groups with local chapter officers/advisors, using a S-W-O-T model (Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities- Threats), to identify specific problems in best practice. (2) Quantitative: Later, use these qualitative findings to develop a national survey of best practices in 1,100 chapters. (3) Policy: Finally, based on these findings, develop a data-based Psi Chi "best practices" policy that would make Psi Chi a model for the other honor societies in ACHS. In 2011, a series of four focus groups was convened in New York City: one with the CASE team, and three with about 25 local chapter officers from three states and Canada. The three moderators were Harold Takooshian, Mercedes McCormick and (in the last group) Jason Young--who used a semi-structured 2x2 S-W-O-T grid as a discussion guide: internal Strengths/Weaknesses x external Opportunities/Threats.

FINDINGS. The findings of three of these four focus sessions were of an intensity rarely encountered in behavioral research, gravitating quickly and strongly to the "T" in SWOT: "Threat." Most of the officers in these dozen chapters discovered they were not alone in quietly enduring many forms of nonsupport or even discouragement of their noble efforts on their campus. This is one of many examples: An institution's College Catalog proudly tells the world that it has an active Psi Chi Honor Society on its campus, then tells the chapter it is totally ineligible for even one dollar of financial support for its activities because it is an "exclusionary club." This is one of many examples of clear but preventable threats to "best practices" of Psi Chi chapters and their officers. With rare exception (Pergament, 2009), these abuses are naturally covered up by their schools--the way Penn State doggedly covered up 20 years of Sandusky sex abuse. Some first-hand examples appear in Appendix 1 below.

------** Presentation to the symposium on "Psi Chi and the promotion of student excellence," at the 40th Psychology Convention, New York City, 1 April 2012. This research was funded by a generous Psi Chi Thelma Hunt Research Grant to CASE in 2011. Direct any inquiries to Harold at [email protected]. 2

POLICY. To offer vital support to its chapters and their officers, what can Psi Chi and its Board do to remedy this? Three simple yet promising suggestions arose: (1) CASE. Form a new, ad hoc blue-ribbon Psi Chi CASE, composed of a handful of past national officers with experience and a heart for Psi Chi to develop suggestions for "best practices" based on chapter input and their experience, and receive reports of problems from chapters. (2) SURVEY. Use the 10-point student activities checklist as the heart of a national census of the health of the 1,100 Psi Chi chapters. (3) PSA's. Enlist a handful of nationally-respected Psi Chi Distinguished members (like , Florence Denmark, ) to tape a series of short but powerful 120-second Public Services Announcements at the Fordham TV studio or a regional conference, suitable for wide circulation to YouTube and 1,100 college presidents. Some themes, to counter any misconceptions: (a) The growth of US psychology, (b) The importance of psychology in STEM science education, (c) The value of a Psi Chi chapter to a school, (d) The value of a Psi Chi chapter to individual students, (e) Psi Chi is not an exclusionary group, (f) The role of Psi Chi in creating future leaders, (g) Schools' responsibility to support their Psi Chi chapter; (h) The international role of Psi Chi.

CASE faculty (l to r): Richard S. Velayo (Pace), Jason R. Young (Hunter), Vincent Prohaska (Lehman), Henry Solomon (Marymount Manhattan), Florence L. Decnmark (Pace), Mercedes A. McCormick (Pace), John D. Hogan (St. John's), Cheryl Camenzuli (Molloy), Harold Takooshian (Fordham).

References

Hogan, J.D., & Takooshian, H. (2004, Spring). Psi Chi, the National Honor Society in Psychology: 75 years of scholarship and service. Eye on Psi Chi, 8, 16-39. [http://www.psichi.org/Pubs/Articles/Article_432.aspx] Takooshian, H. (1999, Summer). President's message: Researching Psi Chi for fun and profit. Eye on Psi Chi, 3 (4), 87-88. [http://www.psichi.org/Pubs/Articles/Article_102.aspx] Pergament, R. (2009, Feb 4). The Ram investigates: Student Activities Budget. The Ram, pages 16-18. 3

Student activities: Best practices checklist

How well do college campuses and their student activities offices encourage their Psi Chi chapter and other student groups? Across 1,100 U.S. campuses, Student Activities offices are highly varied--from wonderful dreams that build up students to horrid nightmares that tear them down. Here is a checklist of 10 evidence-based criteria to rate the performance of a school's student activities office. At a meeting of your Psi Chi chapter officers, simply rate each of these ten as a "0" for negative, "2" for positive, and "1" for anything mixed or in-between--so the campus' overall score falls between 0 and 20. This number can be a yardstick to compare your chapter with those at other schools, or with itself over the years.

1. 0 1 2 Tone. First and foremost, a tone that is encouraging rather than adversarial. If a club had a problem, its officers are encouraged (not punished or quietly cast aside). 2. 0 1 2 Transparency. Each semester the campus press publishes a detailed list of each club’s request and allocation, so monies are publicly accounted (not secret). 3. 0 1 2 Faculty. The student budget committee must always have 1 or 2 faculty reps. 4. 0 1 2 Dual relation. Club officers on the student budget committee recuse themselves and leave the room when their own club’s budget is reviewed. (Budgeters are not insiders who can fund their own club.) 5. 0 1 2 Fairness. If a club’s budget follows the simple rules, it is not denied funding with excuses like no room number, or could be justified better. 6. 0 1 2 Micromanagement. Once an event is funded, there is no attempt to disqualify an event due to minor necessary changes in panelists, refreshments, or room number. 7. 0 1 2 Paperwork. A club reports on its past activities just one time, as part of submitting the next budget—not multiple times (pre-event form, post-event form, new budget). 8. 0 1 2 Pride. The student activities office expresses visible pride in outstanding club activities, and deans often participate in programs. 9. 0 1 2 Advance notice. At start of semester, dates are announced to students and advisors well in advance—for Club Days, budget deadlines. 10. 0 1 2 Inclusive. All subgroups of students are welcome to participate-- evening and day, commuters and residential, part and full-time.

_____ = Total score (0-20) 4

Appendix 1 Worst practices: Some verbatims from Psi Chi chapter officers

A. Uncovered scam. School A has a dynamic Psi Chi chapter for many years, which won the national Cousins Award in past years, but it continually faces two problems. (1) It is not funded by the school, but must rely on indirect funding through the Psychology Club. (2) Student Activities collects a $76 fee per student each semester, yet consistently under- funds psychology at about $800 for an entire semester. But in fall 2010, the club received a sudden windfall rise in allocation from $800 to $2,000. It turns out the Student Activities office is the opposite of transparent, secretly skimming student money for unauthorized purposes. This was revealed by a committee of accounting student volunteers who audited, and discovered this scam, causing the school to immediately rechannel the missing money back to the clubs, while instituting future reforms. This news was not published in any public document, so may well be quietly occurring in other nontransparent schools.

B. Re-activated. At School B, the Psi Chi chapter is now fully active under a new faculty advisor after several semi-active years. Things also work well with funding, now that the new Student Government has reformed its procedures the past two years.

C. Non-funding. At school C, a respected professor was pleased to serve as Psi Chi advisor, to keep alive the school’s Psi Chi chapter. But she found the school offered no support at all to Psi Chi, so students had to raise funds through bake sales, or she quietly paid from her own pocket to cover chapter expenses. The school’s student activities refuses to fund an honor society, and the new moderator of the funded psychology club is not always friendly to cooperate with Psi Chi--thinking of it as elitist, perhaps without realizing her chapter’s activities are open to all.

D. Malfeasance. School D has problems. Its Student Activities funds honor societies, but it is not transparent with its allocations of the $100 fee that each student pays per semester. Finally, a detailed expose by student reporters in the campus newspaper uncovered severe festering problems. It turns out some clubs are quietly allocated over $50,000, while most receive under $100 for all activities for the entire semester, based on alleged flaws in their applications. Once again, Psi Chi officers were demoralized when they submitted a detailed 24-page budget, only to receive a meager $64 without explanation. The faculty advisor had to ask the department to pass a resolution to encourage the Psi Chi chapter, which it did unanimously.

E. Fear. At School E, the Student Activities Office (SAO) blatantly plays favorites among student clubs, while openly punishing student groups that challenge these biases. School E officers travelled many miles for this Psi Chi focus group because they are very happy that Psi Chi is now examining "best practices," but it is essential that their school's name does not appear anywhere in this Hunt report in any way, to avoid retribution by their school's SAO.

------Some issues raised here: 1. Should a school benefit from the honor of having a Psi Chi chapter while deliberately not supporting it? 2. If a Psi Chi chapter arranges public events to benefit non-members, should these events be excluded from funding simply because they are arranged by Psi Chi? 3. Should Psi Chi have a role if its chapter’s elected officers are not treated respectfully? 4. Should Psi Chi reprimand a school where its Psi Chi chapter officers are clearly mistreated?