Two remarkable events happened in the summer of 1999 in psychology, the Psychology Partnerships Project (P3) and the approval of national standards for high school psychology. P3 was five years in the planning with the goal of linking teaching psychologists across the varied educational levels. The five-day national forum held in June on the campus of James Madison University brought together high school, community college, and university psychology teachers who committed themselves to make a difference in the way psychology is done and upgrading the way psychology is delivered. The attendees were divided into the following nine working groups: Advising, Curriculum, Faculty Development, Research, Technology, Assessment, Diversity, Partnerships, and Service Learning. Each group was charged with developing one or more partnership projects designed to address one or more of the critical issues identified by the groups. Each project is designed to produce a product of some kind such as an article, web page, committee, or book. Members of the groups are submitting proposals to their respective regional psychology conventions for sessions designed to explain to colleagues what the groups have planned and provide updates of the various projects. Be on the lookout for these sessions in your convention programs.

Later in the summer, the APA Council of Representative unanimously approved the high school standards in psychology. APA commissioned the Task Force on National High School Psychology Standards in 1995 because failure to establish the standards would be a severe blow to the legitimacy of high school psychology and in many instances would result in the suspension of the introductory class from a school district's course offerings (Ernst & Petrossian, 1996, p. 258). The standards should convincingly establish psychology's legitimacy to high school principals and local school boards around the nation. We think the standards, however, will accomplish far more than this. The standards clearly yet succinctly define the depth and breadth of scientific psychology for nonpsychologists. No other past or current document does this; consequently, we are predicting that the standards will become the most important document APA and the discipline of psychology have ever produced. Besides distributing the standads through regular APA channels, we also recommend that APA bind the standards and sell them through outlets such as Barnes and Noble.

The standards prompt two questions from us. First, who will teach the high school psychology courses defined by the standards? There are 1600 high school psychology teachers in TOPSS (S. Simons, personal communication, July 22, 1999) who are qualified and committed to teach the standards-based course. However, Ernst and Petrossian (1996) estimate that there are 12,000 high school psychology teachers. Ragland (1992) reported 15% of the high school psychology teachers were certified in psychology and would be qualified to teach the standards-based course. The best case scenario would mean that approximately one-fourth of the 12,000 teachers have the background and resources to teach the standards-based course.

Many initiatives have occurred this decade to support high school psychology teachers including the creation of TOPSS, National Science Foundation summer institutes, the College Board's Advanced Placement workshops, TOPSS workshops and convention sessions, the Psych-News listserv, Psychology Teacher Network and PsychSIG newsletters, and local and state efforts (see Weaver & Davidson, 1997). As a result, high school psychology teachers have enriched the discipline by contributing articles to American Psychologist and Teaching of Psychology, editing teaching activities handbooks, teaching on Psychology Place, leading convention sessions, write books, and holding leadership positions in professional organizations.

We propose a new initiative which would more broadly ensure the prerequisite training for prospective high school psychology teachers. We propose that APA, APS, CTUP, and state psychological associations apply their political expertise and grass roots networks to move state education departments toward establishing an endorsement in psychology (some states already have this). This would provide high school psychology teachers the necessary background for teaching the standards-based course.

Our second question prompted by the standards is what will they do for the college introductory psychology course? The Advanced Placement psychology examination allows high school students to test out of the college introductory psychology course. But what if a student earns an A and a B in two semesters of high school psychology taught according to the standards. How should a college or university gauge this performance against a 3 (or 4 or 5) on the Advanced Placement examination? This question then prompts additional ones. Should college credit be denied for doing well in the standards-based, two semester high school course? As a recruiting tool, will college/university departments of psychology count the two-semester high school psychology course for credit? Could the possibility of college credit encourage more high school students to take two semesters of psychology rather than one and thus be an engine for growth in the awareness of psychology? Who will determine whether the two-semester high school psychology course is taught according to the standards and how will this determination be made?

The American Psychological Association and especially the Education Directorate are to be commended for the leadership, vision, and financial support of both of these initiatives. Special kudos are due the members of the P3 Steering Committee and the Standards Task Force--many of whom are CTUP members--for their countless hours on behalf of psychology education. They should be very gratified with the fruits of their efforts. Thank you so much, colleagues.

The summer of 1999 has indeed been a memorable one for psychology. We predict that the effects of P3 and the standards will reverberate both in and out of the discipline for decades to come.

Ernst, R., & Petrossian, P. (1996). Teachers of Psychology in Secondary Schools (TOPSS): Aiming for excellence in high school psychology instruction. American Psychologist, 51, 256-258.

Ragland, R. G. (1992). Teachers and teacher education in high school psychology: A national survey. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 73-78.

Weaver, K. A., & Davidson, M. J. (1997, August). Collaboration between high school and college psychology faculty: Four models. Symposium presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.

Welcome back to the printed version of Significant Difference! It has been a while since we have been in print. We have experimented with posting our newsletter on our web site, but our Executive Board felt that direct contact was preferable. The publication and distribution of this newsletter is made possible by Christine Cubby and the Education Directorate of the American Psychological Association.

My term as National President of CTUP began at the August business meeting held at the APA Convention. Thanks to the work of Mary Allen, Past-President, CTUP is positioned to forge a strong, collaborative relationship with the Society for the Teaching of Psychology (Division Two). If I can be of help to any CTUP member, please feel free to contact me directly: (208) 426-1993 or elandru@boisestate.edu.

I sometimes wonder how I get myself into the positions that I do. I guess I am just not good at saying no. It was just a few short years ago that I found myself agreeing to serve as Midwestern Regional Coordinator begging Eric (now CTUP President) to mentor me. As it turns out, the bulk of the work is done by CTUP members and their love for teaching related programming at the regional conferences. If I have served effectively in the capacity of regional coordinator it has been because I have been able to rely on so many others who have nurtured CTUP and regional programming from its infancy to a recognized force. I cannot help but think that Division Two's interest in CTUP and APA's Education Direcorate interest in CTUP comes about because of the quality of CTUP programming at the regional conferences. The "present" of any organization is only as solid as its past. When I consider those that have come into this position before me, I am humbled. Each of these individuals has proven him/herself to be both master teacher and masterful motivator. How many of us, for example, have been asked to do more than we thought we could do by Jane Halonen?

The future of CTUP looks bright from where I am standing. My main concern is to increase the ability of this organization to expand teaching programming at the regional conferences without losing our grassroots control over that programming. That will be a challenge. As we are given more scheduling time at the regionals, programming will become a larger task. We need to maintain the flow of input from CTUP members so that programming truly reflects the diverse nature of our membership. We must maintain and expand the partnerships started between high school, community college, and four year institutions of higher learning. Lest we forget, high school and community college colleagues have a lot do with who does and who does not apply for admission at our four-year institutions.

As I look forward to serving as CTUP President-Elect, President, and then Past-President, I plan to be forward thinking but ever mindful of CTUP's past. Great organizations cannot continue to be great by ignoring the future. Nor can they continue to be great by forgetting the strengths upon which they are built. Two strengths appear to me to dominate CTUP: (1) the willingness of its members to work hard to promote the excellence of undergraduate education specifically, and education in general, and (2) the grassroots influence on programming that separates the bureaucratic processes of the council that allow us to grow and expand from the content of our programming. I intend to remain ever watchful of both of these strengths. With the continued support of the CTUP membership, these characteristics will be as strong or stronger when I leave CTUP leadership as they are now that I am entering. If you have any questions, concerns, ideas, etc. to share about CTUP in general or CTUP programming specifically, please feel free to email me at reosborn@indiana.edu.

Put simply, excellence in regional programming is the heart and soul of CTUP. Many of our high school, community college, college and university colleagues cannot or choose not to attend national conferences such as those sponsored by the American Psychological Association, American Psychological Society, or the National Institute for the Teaching of Psychology. CTUP is proud to continue to offer quality regional programming at conferences. To poorly paraphrase from Zenith, "quality regional programming goes in when the CTUP name goes on."

For more information, contact CTUP regional coordinator Bob Keefer at (301) 447-5394 ext. 4251 or keefer@msmary.edu.

Speakers and symposia tentatively planned for the CTUP portion of MPA:

• CTUP Distinguished Speaker Presentation
• The Psychology Major: A Developmental Approach
• It Can Be Taught! Hands-on Activities That Model the Process of Critical Thinking
• CTUP Special Session: The Creative Student
• Luncheon sponsored by the APA Education Directorate
• CTUP Special Poster Session: The Creative Classroom
• Promoting Active Learning Through Undergraduate Involvement in Research
• Assessment Revisited--Designing Active Assessment Strategies for Courses and Programs
• Technology and Course Management: Rethinking the Course to Benefit the Student and the Teacher

For more information, contact CTUP regional coordinator and president-elect Randall Osborne at (765) 973-8445 or reosborn@indiana.edu

Activities tentatively planned for the CTUP portion of RMPA:

• Distinguished Lecture by Stephen Davis: "Alcoholic Rats Consume Yucky Tasting Stuff Before Engaging in Discrimination at the Shopping Center: Things That Make Psychology Interesting"
• Virtual Classroom Sponsored by Prentice-Hall
• Making the Connection: Psychology Partnerships Panel
• CTUP/Society for Teaching of Psychology (Division Two) Poster Session

For more information contact CTUP regional coordinator Nancy Karlin at (970) 351-2717 or njkarli@bentley.unco.edu.

For more information contact CTUP regional coordinator Jay Brophy at mailto:Brophy@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu

For more information, contct Marilyn Pugh at (817) 531-4955 or pughm@txwes.edu.

The program planned by CTUP for the spring WPA meetings promises to be an exciting one. Our annual "Last Lecture" series will feature presentations by Bert Raven (UCLA), Robert Levine (CSU, Frenso), and Ann Ewing (Mesa Community College). A featured part of our program will be an invited guest lecture by President-Elect of APS, Robert Bjork (UCLA) on "Teaching as as Skill: Attitudes and Assumptions that Impede Effective Instruction." Also, a round table discussion is being planned by Maureen Hester (Holy Names College) that is designed to assist high school teachers of psychology to plan their courses and curriculum. Finally, long-time CTUP members Bob Johnson and Karen Huffman will by testing their psychological knowledge in a session of "Psychological Jeopardy."

For more information, contact CTUP regional coordinator Jerry Shaw at (818) 677-2812 or jerry.shaw@csun.edu or Susan Horton at (480) 461-7029 or mailto:horton@mc.maricopa.edu

At each of the regional conferences, CTUP has strong collaborative ties with Division Two and APA's Education Directorate. At each conference, participants will be able to hear the latest from the Psychology Partnerships Project (P3) from participants in their region. The Education Directorate is also active in hosting receptions at conferences as well as sponsoring TOPSS (Teaching of Psychology in the Secondary Schools) workshops.

As usual, the strength of CTUP rests with its regional coordinators. If you have the chance to attend a regional conference in the coming year, please find your regional coordinator at that conference and thank them in person for the fine program that they developed. Also, please be sure to check the final program listings for specific times and dates at your regional conference. The information provided here is only tentative and accurate at this time (December 1999).