ERIC EJ1146406: Teaching Sensitive Issues: Psychological Literacy as an Antidote to Pedagogic Frailty

2017·0.27 MB·English

by  ERIC

Teaching Sensitive Issues: Psychological
literacy as an antidote to pedagogic frailty
Naomi E. Winstone & Ian M. Kinchin
Many topics within the psychology curriculum can be described as ‘sensitive’, with potential for students to
experience distress and discomfort. Given the pressure experienced by academics in Higher Education, the
potential for student distress or complaints might lead lecturers to adopt a risk-averse approach to teaching,
which is well represented by the concept of Pedagogic Frailty (Kinchin et al., 2016). Through interviews with
nine psychology lecturers, we uncover the common concerns that arise when teaching sensitive topics, and
the strategies employed to overcome these concerns. We also suggest that where teaching is strongly influenced
by the values underpinning Psychological Literacy, those teaching sensitive topics may be less vulnerable to
the characteristics of Pedagogic Frailty, as the risks associated with the teaching of sensitive topics are offset
by the perceived importance of exposing students to sensitive topics. The implications for the teaching of
psychology are discussed.
Keywords: Psychological literacy; pedagogic frailty; sensitive topics; risk aversion; learning environment.
ONE OF THE CHARACTERISTICS of the broader community’; ‘Being insightful and
psychology as a discipline is that the reflective about ones’ own and others’ behaviour
student and the studied are one and and mental processes’; and ‘Recognising, under-
the same; psychology involves the study of standing and fostering respect for diversity’.
people, by people. In one way, this confers There are many areas within the
an advantage as students’ engagement with psychology curriculum where students have
course material can be enhanced through the opportunity to apply psychological prin-
reflexive awareness. However, the coun- ciples to personal and social issues, and where
terpoint is the likelihood that students will they can reflect on their own behaviour and
personally identify with the material being mental processes. The elements of psycho-
studied, and this can leave students vulner- logical literacy listed above would be relevant
able to discomfort. to the teaching of many areas of psychology
In recent years, undergraduate Psychology including, but not limited to: personality,
education has become increasingly organ- intelligence, social influence, stigma, phys-
ised around the concept of psychological ical and mental health, and sexuality. All of
literacy. This organising concept represents these topics represent what we might class as
not only possessing knowledge, skills and ‘sensitive’ (Poe, 2000). Whilst it is important
competencies, but also being able to apply for students of psychology to understand,
one’s learning of psychology to real-world for example, the aetiology of depression,
problems and situations (e.g. Halpern, if a student themselves or a close friend or
2010). Looking to some of the components family member have experience of this or
of psychological literacy as represented by another mental illness, then they may find
McGovern et al. (2010, p.11), this application lectures upsetting. Many psychology educa-
is readily apparent. Core elements of being tors are keenly aware of the risks associated
psychologically literate include: ‘Having a with the teaching of sensitive topics, and
well-defined vocabulary and basic knowledge of may struggle to balance coverage of impor-
the critical subject matter of psychology’; ‘Applying tant topics alongside an ethical approach
psychological principles to personal, social and to teaching which ‘includes attention to
organisational issues in work, relationships and avoiding actions or inactions that may cause
Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017 15
Naomi E. Winstone & Ian M. Kinchin
students educational or emotional harm’ tive discourse (the values that underpin
(Hill & Zinsmeister, 2012, p.125). teaching); lack of synergy between pedagogy
One potentially useful framework for and discipline; unresolved tension within the
understanding these challenges faced by research-teaching nexus; and a perceived
psychology educators when teaching sensi- external locus of control.
tive issues is pedagogic frailty (Kinchin et We might therefore imagine that a
al., 2016). The framework proposes that the lecturer experiencing the symptoms of frailty
multiple demands and changing pressures would be concerned about the risks involved
of academia render vulnerability to frailty, in teaching sensitive topics, and prefer
which in this sense reflects greater propen- instead to adopt a ‘safe and sustainable’
sity to be adversely affected by changes to the approach by minimising students’ exposure
environment: to such material. This risk averse approach
is more likely if the discourse of pedagogy
‘In the context of higher education teaching, focuses on what and when to teach material
one might observe pedagogic frailty when (i.e. the instructional discourse) rather than
colleagues find the cumulative pressures of the values underlying the curriculum (i.e.
academia eventually inhibiting their capacity the regulative discourse), and if there is no
to change practice in response to an evolving clear link between what to teach and how to
teaching environment, leading them to adopt teach it (i.e. a lack of synergy between disci-
what they might consider a ‘safe’ and sustain- pline and pedagogy). In addition, this risk
able pedagogic approach’ (Kinchin et al., averse approach is more likely if unresolved
2016, p.2). tension exists within the research-teaching
nexus, for example where the pressure to
In the pedagogic frailty framework (see reach research targets limits the time avail-
Figure 1), this sense of frailty, characterised able to develop innovative approaches to
by risk aversion and a loss of adaptability, is teaching, and if the individual perceives they
influenced by: the predominance of instruc- have little agency to implement change (i.e.
tional discourse (e.g. the content, pacing an external locus of control).
Teaching Sensitive Topics
and sequencing of teaching) over regula- How might this framework inform
PEDAGOGIC  
FRAILTY
increases  with  lack  of   increases  with   increases  with  
increases  with  lack  of  
embeddedness   unresolved  tensions   perceived  distance  to
explicit  and  shared
between within  the
Informs PEDAGOGY   requires RESEARCH   must LOCUS    
REGULATIVE  
AND   TEACHING   OF  
DISCOURSE
links   DISCIPLINE iterative   NEXUS inform CONTROL
between dialogue  
with
requires  agentic  engagement  with

Figure 1: Model of pedagogic frailty (Kinchin et al., 2016).
Figure 1. Model of Pedagogic Frailty (Kinchin et al., 2016)
16 Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017
31
Pedagogic frailty and teaching sensitive topics
our understanding of the teaching of the inherent risks, what steps can be taken to
psychology? Kinchin et al. (2016) argue that mitigate against adverse outcomes? Several
of the four influences on pedagogic frailty, authors have emphasised the importance of
the strength of regulative discourse, and the giving students advance notice that poten-
synergy between pedagogy and discipline tially sensitive material will be covered in
are more strongly under the control of the class (Finken, 2006; Goss-Lucas & Bern-
individual, whereas the degree of tension stein, 2005; Russell et al., 2008). Whilst it is
within the research-teaching nexus, and the possible for students to be told that they can
distance of the perceived locus of control leave a class if they find the material uncom-
from the individual, are more strongly under fortable (Lantz, 2010), it is better for them
the control of the institution. Therefore, to know in advance of attending, as leaving
when considering the decision-making of a classroom makes their discomfort salient
an individual psychology lecturer faced with to everyone (Brooke, 1999). When covering
teaching sensitive material, we can look to sensitive material, Lantz (2010) suggests that
the first two influences. very clear ground rules for class discussion,
Pedagogic frailty has already been including confidentiality, need to be agreed
explored in the context of psychology educa- in advance, and that educators need to
tion (Winstone & Hulme, 2017). Through an ensure that their own views and feelings do
interrogation of the framework in the context not influence the way in which they teach.
of the teaching of psychology, Winstone and It is also recommended that educators illus-
Hulme concluded that psychological literacy, trate material using vignettes or case studies,
as a concept, might confer an advantage in rather than asking students to share their
terms of minimising vulnerability to frailty. own experiences (Finken, 2006).
First, psychological literacy, if embedded It is evident that many of the topics
at programme level, has the potential to taught within the psychology curriculum
facilitate explicit discussion of the regula- can be classed as sensitive. The controversy
tive discourse. This is because psychological arising from sensitive topics can readily lead
literacy is values-based, and these values to student complaints (e.g. Pittenger, 2006),
have the potential to drive pedagogic deci- which may lead educators to adopt the risk
sion-making. Second, psychological literacy aversive approach to teaching that is charac-
is an integrative disciplinary concept, in teristic of a state of pedagogic frailty. The aim
that it binds together what is taught (the of the present study was to explore the views
discipline) with how it is taught (the peda- held by psychology educators regarding the
gogy); the emphasis on the application of teaching of sensitive topics, and to uncover
psychological knowledge directly informs the strategies they adopt when teaching such
pedagogic decision-making. Winstone and issues.
Hulme also suggest how psychological
literacy might buffer against the adoption Method
of a safe and sustainable approach when Participants
teaching sensitive topics. Through presenta- Interviews were undertaken with nine
tion of a case study, they show how a social psychology academics, all of whom taught
psychology lecturer was willing to take signif- on a BSc Psychology programme at a univer-
icant risks in exposing students to distressing sity in the South East of England. Recruit-
situations in the field, and how these deci- ment involved inviting 15 lecturers who
sions were driven by the values underlying taught areas of psychology where poten-
psychological literacy. tially ‘sensitive’ content would be covered
According to Pittenger (2006), it is impos- to participate; of these, nine agreed to take
sible to teach a psychology course without part (see Table 1). All participants were
invoking and confronting controversy. Given female. The participants represented a wide
Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017 17
Naomi E. Winstone & Ian M. Kinchin
range of teaching experience, ranging from teaching, within which participants were
1 to 30 years. Of the nine participants, two invited to explain the areas of psychology
were Teaching Fellows, five were Lecturers, they teach. Participants were then asked to
one was a Reader, and one was a Professor. identify potentially sensitive topics in the
All participants were acquainted with the teaching of psychology, and to discuss poten-
first author. tial approaches to teaching those topics. The
length of the interviews ranged from 11 to
33 minutes, with an average of 20 minutes
Table 1: Participant details.
(SD=8).
Following completion of the interview,
Pseudonym Curriculum areas taught participants were presented with a list of
the 10 core areas of psychology taught in
Clare Developmental Psychology UK BPS-accredited Psychology BSc degrees
(BPS, 2016: Cognitive Psychology; Devel-
Victoria Social Psychology opmental Psychology; Social Psychology;
Biological Psychology; Conceptual and
Nicola Social Psychology Historical Issues in Psychology (CHIP);
Personality and Individual Differences; Data
Helen Clinical Psychology Analysis; Quantitative Methods; Qualitative
Methods; Ethics). They were instructed to
Lisa Health Psychology
first rank the 10 areas according to how
sensitive they perceived the topic content
Alice Health Psychology
to be (where 1 represented the most sensi-
tive area, and 10 the least sensitive area).
Sharon Developmental Psychology
Finally, they were asked to rank the same
ten areas according to their real-world rele-
Penny Personality and Individual
vance (where 1 represented the greatest real-
Differences
world relevance, and 10 the least real-world
Rebecca Health Psychology
relevance). The purpose of this activity was
to gain insight into participants’ views of
the potential sensitivity of different areas of
Procedure the psychology curriculum, alongside their
The protocol was reviewed by the Institu- perception of the real-world relevance of
tion’s Ethics Committee, and a favourable the subject content. The activity took place
ethical opinion granted. Participants were at the end of the interview so as to avoid
recruited via email, and were invited to influencing participants’ discussion during
take part in an interview about approaches the interview.
to teaching psychology. All participants
provided informed consent for their partici- Analysis
pation, and during this process it was made Interviews were transcribed verbatim and
clear to participants that the study was not subjected to thematic analysis (Braun &
an evaluation of their own teaching practice, Clarke, 2006). Specifically, a realist approach
but rather an opportunity to explore the was utilised, incorporating an inductive and
influences on pedagogic decision-making iterative process of identifying semantic
within their subject area. themes. First, a phase of familiarisation with
Interviews were audio recorded to allow the data entailed multiple readings of all
later transcription, and followed a semi-struc- nine transcripts by both authors indepen-
tured format. The interview schedule began dently, noting any initial codes that were
with a general discussion of approaches to evident within transcripts. Due to a high
18 Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017
Pedagogic frailty and teaching sensitive topics
degree of commonality in the codes identi- 1. With groups of about 20 as opposed to a
fied across transcripts and between the two hundred…. it’s a lower risk strategy trying to
authors, the next phase involved analysis of open [discussion]. (Lisa)
the whole sample. Here, the initial codes 2. I don’t think I would want to do [sensitive
were grouped into themes, and then itera- topics] with a first year. And I would never do
tively refined through application of a coding it, erm, in the big lecture theatre. I think that’s
framework to the complete set of transcripts. only good for small groups, once students
Analysis of the entire sample and the appli- know each other, and they’re accepting and
cation of the coding framework were initially supportive of each other. (Clare)
undertaken by the first author, following
which the second author reviewed the coded Here, lecturers express a belief that the
transcripts to ensure reliability. Inter-author teaching of sensitive material requires a good
agreement was high, so the coding of the level of rapport between students, and that
first author was taken as reliable. the discussion needed to facilitate discus-
sion of sensitive topics is less ‘risky’ with
Findings smaller groups. Lecturers also discussed how
Analysis of the interview transcripts revealed the nature of the topic being taught was an
four main themes representing the key important influence on the kind of learning
elements of teaching sensitive material. Within environment that could be created, and how
each main theme, four subthemes emerged safe students perceive that environment to be:
(see Table 2). There was strong convergence
of data, with evidence of each theme and 3. If you’re talking about things like um gender
subtheme in each of the nine transcripts. or sexual health… clearly it’s more sensitive…
and it’s also less commonly talked about full
Learning environment stop. Whereas, you know, physical health,
When discussing their teaching of sensitive whether its cancer, heart attack… that is a bit
topics, the lecturers discussed the learning more part of our general dialogue, so I think
environment as an influence on their students can open up about that a lot more.
teaching, as well as something they specifi- (Lisa)
cally craft to create an environment condu-
cive to the discussion of potentially sensitive It was also evident from their discussions that
material. For several lecturers, the size and lecturers pay particularly close attention to their
level of group that they are teaching influ- use of humour and language when teaching
ences the extent to which they feel comfort- sensitive material, and that this represents an
able covering sensitive topics: important dimension of the learning environ-
Table 2: Main themes and subthemes.
Main Theme Learning Concerns Strategies to manage Psychological
environment concerns Literacy
Subthemes Group size Distress Disclaimers Real-world
application
Nature of Topic Self-disclosure and Opt in Legitimisation of
misdiagnosis issues
Use of language and Lack of training Signposting Students as
humour ambassadors
Rapport Complaints Heightened awareness Student interest
Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017 19
Naomi E. Winstone & Ian M. Kinchin
ment that is specifically crafted to support the I think helps. We had a bit of a conversation
teaching of sensitive topics. Penny, an Indi- about confidentiality if you hear somebody
vidual Differences lecturer, explained how she else’s disclosure. (Penny)
reigned in her use of humour because of the
perceived risk of causing offence: As expressed by Penny, the importance of
developing rapport and a ‘safe’ environment
4. I suppose when I’ve taught things that are for the exploration of sensitive topics can
more benign, less risky I’d be more likely to have influence not only what is taught and how,
like a cartoon to illustrate or give an example a but also when this material is covered.
bit extreme or a bit humorous. I don’t do that
when it comes to sensitive topics. (Penny) Concerns
When discussing the teaching of sensi-
The nature of language used is also a consid- tive topics, lecturers were clear in voicing
eration for lecturers when teaching sensitive concerns about the potential implications,
material. For some, this involved thinking both for themselves and for their students.
about the style of language: Lisa spoke When considering their students, their
about using more benign terminology in her primary concern was of causing distress,
teaching of sensitive topics (‘we talk in a fairly which was a driver of decision-making in the
clinical, more neutral way’), whereas Penny preparation and delivery of content (quotes
explained her sensitivity to the use of termi- 8 and 9), as well as creating concern for
nology that might ‘pigeon hole’ people (‘I students’ independent study (10):
try to avoid slipping into any categorical sounding
terms’). It was also clear that language is a 8. People may have experienced prejudice and
tool which, if harnessed correctly, can help discrimination if this will bring up bad memo-
to create the open and inclusive learning ries for themselves…so you have to really work
environment which is beneficial for the or think very carefully. (Nicola)
teaching of sensitive materials: 9. Well some of the pictures were quite shocking…
I was like ‘pff! God that’s quite graphic!’…
5. If you then annoy [students] by using the you know in terms of the damage that can be
wrong language or talking in a way that they done. (Helen)
find inappropriate then they’ll stop listening, 10. I guess one issue is that you don’t want to
so you have to be very inclusive when you’re cause any distress to the students in the room…
talking, otherwise you’ll lose them. (Alice) or when they go away thinking about the mate-
rial afterwards or when they’re reading about
Alongside the use of language, behaviours it. … we know we’re going to be hitting a lot of
that develop rapport with students, and sensitive buttons. (Penny)
promote shared understanding amongst
students are also important elements of an Beyond causing distress, one particular
appropriate learning environment. Specific concern arising from the teaching of topics
effort is needed to create and facilitate such in the area of mental health is that students
an environment: might, as a result of learning about a particular
area, disclose their own difficulties to the
6. Actually spending time and getting people to lecturer. Penny speaks of this concern, as well
express their opinions and views and create as the likelihood of students misdiagnosing
an environment where people can actually say themselves on the basis of their learning:
those things in a safe place. (Sharon)
7. We move on to these topics part way through 11. I can imagine a teacher feeling wary that a
the module so I feel like we’ve already got student might come and disclose something as
rapport with the students at that point which a result of what they’ve taught. And I have
20 Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017
Pedagogic frailty and teaching sensitive topics
had that quite a few times… But there’s a 17. You know we’re all terrified of [complaints]
danger of…over-diagnosing oneself. Person- aren’t we…I do think there’s a massive culture
ality disorders is a particularly high risk lecture of fear around [student evaluations]…it does
for misdiagnosing because it’s just describing limit the creativity (Helen)
patterns of personality essentially. (Penny)
There are echoes here of risk aversion that
As well as expressing concerns about the characterises pedagogic frailty, with active
impact of teaching sensitive topics on their decisions to adopt a ‘safer’ approach to
students, lecturers also surfaced concerns teaching as a result of the fear of repercus-
about the potential impact on themselves. sions.
Many of the participants (with the excep-
tion of the lecturer in clinical psychology) Strategies to manage concerns
did not feel qualified to deal with students’ The lecturers spoke at length about the
disclosures or distress that might result from steps they take to manage concerns about
the teaching of sensitive topics: student distress and complaints. Nearly all of
the participants explained that they always
12. How would the teacher know without the indi- preface the teaching of sensitive material with
vidual students coming forward and saying a disclaimer, so that students are aware that
‘I don’t feel comfortable with this’? You can’t the material may be potentially upsetting:
anticipate everything and perhaps there is a
one in a million chance that something will 18. With the super-sensitive subjects, at the begin-
happen but if it does it has potential to get ning you say what you are going to be talking
blown out of proportion. (Sharon) about, and if someone doesn’t feel comfortable
13. I guess there’s a combination of expertise in with that, then they obviously can leave the
terms of managing what might come from the room. (Rebecca)
sensitivity but also just thinking through the 19. So I give them disclaimer at the beginning,
realities of should we be doing it this way? and say that if anything does cause offence,
(Helen) you know, just to make me aware. (Nicola)
14. I don’t think I ever got any training or mentor-
ship on how to do this. So it’s been trial In addition, there was also evidence of
and error…mess up and learn from it sort lecturers choosing not to adopt some of the
of approaches. Or, you know, think through teaching techniques that they would use
really carefully in advance. (Penny) with the teaching of more benign subjects.
In particular, lecturers adopted an ‘opt
As well as lack of expertise and training, in’ policy, where students might not be
one of the most prominent concerns was a required to contribute to discussion, provide
fear of student complaints and, the poten- an example from their own experience,
tial implications that might result. It was or to write about a sensitive topic for an
evident from the ways in which lecturers assignment:
spoke of this particular concern that the
‘fear’ of student complaints had a profound 20. If you were doing a sensitive topic you
influence on what they were prepared to do wouldn’t…you wouldn’t force it to become a
in their teaching: compulsory topic, for example as an assess-
15. I’m very sensitive to what [students] might ment. (Lisa)
say. (Clare) 21. I would never, ever ask them for a situa-
16. I think people say ‘okay if I don’t talk about tion… I would never ever do that with race, or
it then I’m not doing my job or if I talk about gender… so I do teach it differently. (Clare)
it then I’m going to get negative repercussions 22. I can imagine if, um, if it was non-sensitive I
and people will view me differently’. (Sharon) would try to make everybody speak and try to
Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017 21
Naomi E. Winstone & Ian M. Kinchin
engage everybody. If it’s sensitive then I would and they’re obviously going to bring that with
be more careful if they feel comfortable speaking them when they learn the different things.
about this. (Victoria) (Sharon)
27. I think throughout when you’re dealing with
Penny also discussed how she consciously such controversial topics it’s also important
signposts students to further sources of that you don’t show bias to students. (Nicola)
support when teaching mental health topics:
Psychological literacy
23. I did also put in the notes, kind of a recommen- The perspectives presented thus far are clear
dation to talk to their personal tutor if anything in showing that lecturers hold concerns
kind of struck home about these things, ‘If you about the teaching of sensitive material,
realise that actually you are worried about your- and enact a variety of strategies to mitigate
self or somebody else, and to that extent then against student distress and complaints.
please talk to someone or see your GP or recom- However, a very clear message came across
mend that they do that’. (Penny) from each and every one of the partici-
pants: that exposing students to sensitive
A further strategy adopted by all of the topics is an important part of developing
participants was to ensure that they were psychological literacy. Alice’s justification for
particularly vigilant to signs of potential stress exposing herself to the potential risks of
in students, both verbal and non-verbal. teaching sensitive material was simply ‘…
Rebecca and Alice, both Health Psycholo- because sensitive topics are just life really’; other
gists, explained how they were constantly participants explained in more depth why,
seeking signs of student discomfort, and in their view, sensitive topics are a crucial
described the actions they would take, whilst part of a psychology education. Interestingly,
maintaining discretion: there was a sense that protecting students
from potentially upsetting material would
24. You have to have emotional intelligence to be doing them a disservice, and would limit
read the room with some sensitive subjects. If their ability to apply their psychological
you see someone getting agitated or uncomfort- training in practice, and to fully participate
able, you can just call a toilet break and take in society:
them to one side. (Rebecca)
25. I’m really aware of… of people looking 28. Oh I think they need to be aware. I think it does
particular ways in the audience. So I can see give them a better stance on why people act the
that someone will be looking at me, looking a way they do. I think it’s something they need
bit upset or a bit tearful or something like that to consider when they’re participating in the
and then I try and change the tone. (Alice) world. (Clare)
29. I think that it’s important that the students
Participants also explained how they ensured understand [sensitive issues] as best we
that they retained an awareness of the indi- can or… or understand what psychologists
viduality of students in accommodating for currently know about them. I mean I think
issues that might arise. They clearly recog- that … any psychology education that doesn’t
nised that each student would bring to the cover things that are sensitive or personal
class a unique personal history, and whilst isn’t… covering all of psychology. (Penny)
it was not possible to know each student’s 30. Well, it’s a reflection of the real world isn’t
background, being sensitive to diversity was a it? I mean, they’re not going to be able to opt
useful strategy to minimise students’ distress: out of engaging with stuff that provokes them
when they leave these hallowed halls. Part of
26. Keeping in mind that each person has a them leaving here as autonomous, critically
different history… background and knowledge thinking, individuals, um, is that they do
22 Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017
Pedagogic frailty and teaching sensitive topics
have to be able to engage with material that is brings that kind of individual level…I’ve had
gonna provoke them. And some of that will be it before where somebody who has had an
personally provocative. (Helen) eating disorder in the past wanted to do more
because she felt that, um, quite often what
Another justification for the importance is written in text books doesn’t really capture
of exposing students to sensitive material what it feels like to have the illness. (Lisa)
emerged as the importance of raising aware-
ness of issues such as mental health, and There was also a recognition within partici-
ensuring that these topics receive open pants’ narratives that many of the topics we
discussion and attention, rather than ‘shying might define as sensitive are also those which
away’ from covering the material. In this way, students are most interested in, and so repre-
the lecturers could be seen to be modelling sent an important part of their psychology
the importance of giving voice to margin- education:
alised groups, which might represent an
important dimension of students’ psycho- 34. And partly it’s… you know it’s as I say some-
logical literacy: thing which drew a lot of students to study
psychology so they’re hungry for information
31. You know I think sometimes we kind of gloss and understanding – even if it’s difficult or
over things. And actually I think people challenging for them to think about. (Penny)
find that more offensive and more upsetting.
Because if it directly relates to you or your Interestingly, Victoria also reflected on the
group then actually you…want it to be… common link between topics that are sensi-
people to understand. I think where it goes tive, and those that have relevance to students’
wrong is where people maybe touch on it too own lives. She expressed how this increases
superficially and that’s where you’re poten- the extent to which students can bring ‘them-
tially going to cause more offence. (Lisa) selves’ to their learning of the topic:
A further dimension of this justification 35. I found that mental health stigma is one of
emerged in discussion of some students’ the topics students are really interested in. I
willingness to share their own experiences. mean they’re psychology students so they kind
Some lecturers explained how students had of have a natural tendency to like the clinical
been very keen to tell the class about their stuff. The more relevant it seems to their lives
own mental health issues. For the students the more they are interested in that and the
concerned, this afforded the opportu- more they also have read or heard something
nity to act as an ‘ambassador’ and to share somewhere else and can engage. (Victoria)
the importance of raising awareness and
dispelling myths and misconceptions: Victoria’s reflection aligns with the find-
ings from the ranking activity (see Figure
32. I had probably three or four students come 2). Perhaps unsurprisingly, social, devel-
up to me at the end of the lecture and one of opmental, and individual differences
them said yeah I’ve had an eating disorder for psychology were rated as the most sensi-
a long time actually, you know, and I was tive of the areas of psychology covered in
thinking ‘Oooh! Crap!’ Um, but she was, you an undergraduate degree. However, what is
know, she was comfortable talking about it in particularly apparent from Figure 2 is that
front of her peers. (Helen) there is close alignment between the extent
33. One student was happy to talk about her to which a topic is seen as being sensitive,
experience of panic attacks and then another and the extent to which that topic holds
student kind of highlighted how it was different real-world application. Perhaps, then, it
for them so I think that’s quite good cos it, it is not surprising that the development of
Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017 23
Teaching Sensitive Topics

Naomi E. Winstone & Ian M. Kinchin
Real-world application Sensitivity
Cognitive
10
Ethics Developmental
8
6
Qualitative 4
Social
Methods
2
0
Quantitative
Biological
Methods
Data analysis CHIP
Personality/
Individual
Differences

Figure 2: Mean ranks for the real-world application and sensitivity of each of the core
areas oFfi gaunr ue n2d. eMrgeraand uraantke sp fsoyrc hthoel orgeya ld-wegorrelde .a Ap prlaincakt ioofn 1 a nredp sreensesintitvs ittyh eo fm eoascth, aonf dth rea ncokr e areas
of 10 the least sensitive/applicable to the real world.
of an Undergraduate Psychology degree. A rank of 1 represents the most, and rank of 10 the
least sensitive/applicable to the real world.
students’ psychological literacy emerged as in teaching raises concerns, and dealing

a clear justification for the teaching of sensi- with these concerns requires management
tive topics, in a way that seems to mitigate strategies that inform the design of the
some o f the concerns raised. learning environment, in order to recognise
the potential sensitivity of the material to be
Links be tween themes covered. As expressed by many participants,
In order to consider how the four themes the concerns raised by the potential impact
emerging from the analysis relate to one of teaching sensitive material (student
another, we constructed a concept map complaints, distress, disclosure) led them
(see, e.g., Novak, 2010) to represent their to adopt particular strategies (e.g. giving
interdependence. This process led us to disclaimers; opt-in approaches) to minimise
propose that psychological literacy acts as an negative outcomes, but also led them to
antidote to the potential frailty that might take a more risk averse approach to their
arise from the concerns experienced in the teaching. We can therefore argue that this
teaching of sensitive topics. Figure 3 repre- serves as evidence of vulnerability to frailty.
sents our mapped links between the first We would also argue that Figure 3 repre-
three themes (i.e. excluding the theme of sents a reactive approach to teaching sensi-
Psychological Literacy): Learning Environ- tive material; it is the sensitive material itself
ment, Concerns, and Strategies to Manage that is driving pedagogic decision-making,
Concerns. The exploration of sensitive topics rather than the discipline itself and the
32

24
  Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 23 No. 1, 2017